For God sakes dude, the Republican platform is not what you say. Please point out a single Republican politician in the last 4 years with any national power that has actively fought to overturn gay marriage or strip gays of any rights. What laws did the Republican controlled house and senate and Republican president sign into law? You tried and failed to say that this is a part of the party platform then got called out for it and said you were tired and thats why you got it wrong. The SCOTUS that had a conservative majority is the same court that decided on gay marriage.

You know damn good and well that gay marriage is here to stay, what you really are is dies in the wool liberal who would have never voted for a Republican no matter how much you claim to align with them on most issues and just like a good liberal you have an extreme hate in your heart for Trump that really can't be rationally explained other than muh feels.

Malibu2 said:

---

I'm guessing 18 is your A&M class year? If so, 2015 isn't that long ago, and those of us elder millennials remember quite well how hard Republicans fought against gay marriage. The country in general has moved on, as have most Republicans, that the gays won that one. That doesn't mean those in the fight don't have long memories and lack interest in giving the people who tried to deny them the right to marriage the benefit of the doubt of their vote.

---

So, I don't want to dwell on this, as it is a bit off topic.

But, I would say that the primary reason most republicans were against gay marriage is because those republicans believed that normalizing it would be the beginning of a slippery slope, where the definition of the nuclear family would come under attack, people that believed in teaching that traditional marriage is a better way would be called bigots, sex education about homosexuality would begin in public schools in kindergarten, and pedophilia would start to be normalized.

We were assured by gay rights activists that the slippery slope argument was a logical fallacy, and none of the above would happen.

They were wrong.

They either lied or were nave. We have Cuties on Netflix, parents mutilating their grade-school kids, and Blues Clues featuring pride month features.

I have said plenty of times, I don't really care if homosexuals want to get married. It's all of the other crap that really pisses me off. The fact that we are where we are on this subject was perfectly foreseeable, and any projections of such were incorrectly dismissed as some sort of conspiracy theory.

But that was back in the dewy days before a technocratic ruling class started enforcing censorship(a), leftist politicians started completely ignoring everything humans have ever learned about economics in order to line their own pockets(b), communism is in vogue(c), the government started infringing on our personal rights to simply congregate based on fake science in order to remain in power(d), and fascists are destroying downtowns under the guise of anti-fascism(e). This subject is not really all that important in the grand scheme of things, and the easily foreseeable problems coming down the pipe.

So, the argument that homosexuals still have their feelings hurt about constitutional rights about marriage, and that being a legitimate reason to vote against republicans even if they have generally better economic policies, rings pretty hollow. If you give leftists and inch of power, they will do everything that they can to take a lightyear.

When SHTF from all these crappy policies, the one thing that you can never say, is that you haven't been told.

Notes:
(a) Orwell
(b) De Tocqueville
(c) McCarthey
(d) Orwell again
(e) Alinsky

TXAGFAN said:

---

My worldview is just fine, I just don't agree that the divisive issues that Republicans push are worth abandoning my own rights for. If they fought for the things they said they did than my issue wouldn't exist in their platform for example.

Lots of words in your post to say "I like my government to be heavily influenced by religion" and I can't get on board with that. Especially when many Republican policies don't follow what may be redeeming things about religion like charity and caring for your fellow man.

Plus, all that talk about religious values and your nominee is trump? You can't be serious...

---

Our country was built on the ideas of judeo-Christian values and a "moral populace." I don't advocate for a theocracy. The fact that your side can't understand that is why you think we are all bigots. Our system doesn't work if we fold to the ideas the Democrats propagate. But, again, you have no interest in understanding the real foundational philosophies of the nation. And that may ultimately be our downfall.

Anyways, good night to you all. We could debate for hours, but I don't think there is much more to talk past each other about.

Have a good one.

Malibu2 said:

---

I'm on your side on the loony left. I fully support ending the lefts craziness. To use a crass and very imperfect analogy, I'm not going to join Al Queda to defeat Maos Cultural revolution. You seem incapable or uninterested in exploring how the right is enthusiastically using the culture war for the same bad ends as the left.

To sum up what I'm talking about in one image:

---

A guy who didn't know how to say "2 Corinthians" - a great Christian man and leader for sure. Even this gay knows how to pronounce/cite the books of the Bible.

Malibu2 said:

---

I'm on your side on the loony left. I fully support ending the lefts craziness.

---

By voting for...the guy who embraced the loony left and set up an express lane for the craziness. Bold strategy.

Malibu2 said:

---

As for DeSantis, why offer up a deplatforming judicial loser? What's the broader strategy if not to fight a culture war?

---

Take a step back from who currently controls the media, and the messages that are being blatantly suppressed.

Is blatant censorship and the silencing of contrary ideas a legitimate, ethical tool in a culture war fought within a free society? Is that really a constructive way to go as a society?

1939 said:

---

For God sakes dude, the Republican platform is not what you say. Please point out a single Republican politician in the last 4 years with any national power that has actively fought to overturn gay marriage or strip gays of any rights. What laws did the Republican controlled house and senate and Republican president sign into law? You tried and failed to say that this is a part of the party platform then got called out for it and said you were tired and thats why you got it wrong. The SCOTUS that had a conservative majority is the same court that decided on gay marriage.

You know damn good and well that gay marriage is here to stay, what you really are is dies in the wool liberal who would have never voted for a Republican no matter how much you claim to align with them on most issues and just like a good liberal you have an extreme hate in your heart for Trump that really can't be rationally explained other than muh feels.

---

Two things...
1) It is DEFINITELY in the party platform, just the quote I originally posted I'm not sure where it came from. I referenced the page above when the other poster posted the RNC platform. Don't be dense, you are in the wrong here. It definitely says marriage is between a man and a woman.
2) Current Republican leadership, like Cruz continued to be vocal opponents of gay marriage. His quotes after the decision in 2015 were clear as day what he thought about the ruling. Sorry if that doesn't fit your 4 year Trump term, but my memory isn't so short I'm just going to just forget.

I'm no fan of trump, but neither were 80 million other people. Republicans need to bring moderates back to party, telling people who have switched their votes up in the last 10 years they are wrong with NO support for that point of view is not a way to bring them back into the fold.

DGAG92 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

Cassius said:

---

Which rights are the conservatives taking away from you?

---

Im not engaging in this tired narrative. I did it for the year leading up to the election with lots of friends and family, the Republican Party has pursued roe v wade for decades and would pursue gay marriage further with their Supreme Court nominees if given the chance. Even though trump the private citizen had no issues with gay people, trump the candidate in 2016 said he would consider justice nominations to overturn gay marriage. The party is desperate and will pander to any evangelical whim if it gets them votes. Look at the threads in last day here, it's clear that is still a popular subject for a lot of republicans.

If republicans are so pro-lgbt then show it - take out the language on marriage from platform, quit pursuing anti-trans legislation, don't ignore gay rights in releases like Trumps list of Supreme Court nominees last fall (which recognized rights related to other marginalized groups like race), etc. Hell, I am not into putting a lot of weight into social media but this is the first June since 2016 the White House acknowledged pride. Talking to me like I'm ignorant on the issue is insulting.

---

OK? You're a democrat. You do know we can take the EXACT same argument, flip it the other way and say you're stifling our religious rights by forcing these unGodly life choices on us. Touche

---

As someone who agrees with you, that isn't really the point of this thread. OP asked for opposing opinions, so give them room to respond.

TXAGFAN said:

---

DallasGrad18 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

Gigem314 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

Both of the people who voted for Biden and posted more than once acknowledged the Democratic Party policies would cost them more money...

---

Not enough for them to care, which was my point.

The Democrats have them right where they want themchasing a boogeyman while voting for policies that can do actual damage to people's rights.

---

Then change your party...

---

Why would we change to appease people like you? You can't even articulate reasons for your beliefs using facts and logic.

---

You say republicans aren't these things yet when presented with clear evidence they are you just say we believe everything democrats say. Now who is dense?

Hope you like a Democrat in office, this trend isn't going to change with attitudes like that and Republican darlings like Cruz, Desantis, etc leading the party. If you were so worried about future of America you'd want to see them focus on all these things that really matter according to many posts here like the economy and 2A and quit wasting time on stuff that doesn't. Many would return to the party. But nah, Desantis signs and anti trans bill on first day of pride because that is SUPER important lol.

---

It's super important to those of us that have daughters. You clearly don't, and can't.

The reality is you willfully ignore things that are way, way more impactful to your life and well being simply because you don't like people not agreeing with your choice to be in a relationship with someone that is completely unnatural. I personally don't care - it's your problem not mine. I have gay family members and I love them, but they're absolutely choosing something that isn't condoned by God and is unnatural (Exhibit A: you can't have a kid).

This is all really about you and your own insecurities. No group or party should change what they know is right to appease people like you for the sake of "winning" elections. There's a much bigger prize out there for those that stand up for what's right.

Your worldview is just so helplessly formed by progressive fan fiction. You clearly do not understand conservative or Republican policy positions and their reasons for them. I highly suggest you research sources that are not progressive propaganda if you truly want to expand your understanding of conservative positions. You clearly do not.

It's like we live in a two-party dominated system that incentives both parties to prey on our worst impulses in search of the prize of governance.

There were two choices in the last election. Culture war vulgarity Turd A
Sandwich v Giant ******. Political philosophy choices Liberal v Conservative. I'm more comfortable with broad government investment than most as more than worth the cost. I vote for liberal turd sandwhich. You vote for Orange ****** conservative.

TXAGFAN said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

I'm on your side on the loony left. I fully support ending the lefts craziness. To use a crass and very imperfect analogy, I'm not going to join Al Queda to defeat Maos Cultural revolution. You seem incapable or uninterested in exploring how the right is enthusiastically using the culture war for the same bad ends as the left.

To sum up what I'm talking about in one image:

---

A guy who didn't know how to say "2 Corinthians" - a great Christian man and leader for sure. Even this gay knows how to pronounce/cite the books of the Bible.

---

Like "The Palmists" Biden and his campaign team faking pictures of him going to church where he's not allowed to take communion?

1939 said:

---

For God sakes dude, the Republican platform is not what you say. Please point out a single Republican politician in the last 4 years with any national power that has actively fought to overturn gay marriage or strip gays of any rights. What laws did the Republican controlled house and senate and Republican president sign into law? You tried and failed to say that this is a part of the party platform then got called out for it and said you were tired and thats why you got it wrong. The SCOTUS that had a conservative majority is the same court that decided on gay marriage.

You know damn good and well that gay marriage is here to stay, what you really are is dies in the wool liberal who would have never voted for a Republican no matter how much you claim to align with them on most issues and just like a good liberal you have an extreme hate in your heart for Trump that really can't be rationally explained other than muh feels.

---

And since I believe in facts...here is a link to Foxnews where they discuss the platform would not change:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-no-new-2020-platform-trump-agenda.amp

Even Fox News when covering the platform mentioned the language around gay marriage and conversion therapy:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-calls-for-new-and-updated-republican-party-platform.amp

The 2016 platform, which was part of the Trump election cycle, went FAR right on many of the issues people in this topic tell me are "over", "decided", "not at risk", etc. For how principled you all keep saying the party is, did I miss something about these issues? The answer is of course not, they are a reflection of the current party. They just haven't acted on them because they are losers, but if they can somehow get Trump or find a majority again they'll be front and center.

TXAGFAN said:

---

This is tired, the parties may have the same names as 50+ years ago, but their ideologies are wildly different. Only the gay rights issue is relevant to current history and no one has ever said the democrats were great allies before late 00's. Only one party continued and still continues the narrative that gay is bad.

---

Good grief...Maybe you should stop identifying as a gay man and try to be an individual for once. Newsflash! Gay people are no longer oppressed in this country.

TXAGFAN said:

---

This is tired, the parties may have the same names as 50+ years ago, but their ideologies are wildly different. Only the gay rights issue is relevant to current history and no one has ever said the democrats were great allies before late 00's. Only one party continued and still continues the narrative that gay is bad.

---

It is bad. It's wrong, just like me lusting after women that aren't my wife.

The difference is I can take criticism for things I know are wrong but that I, as a man, am inclined to do. I fight those urges because I know that's what is best for me.

You don't, and demand people pat you on the back for it. You're weak. That's really all there is to it.

This will blow your mind, lots of us have kids and are pretty good parents. I won't say gay people want kids more than straight people, but not many straight couples stroke a 6 figure check for surrogacy and medical procedures to make that dream a reality.

Malibu2 said:

---

Oh Lord. The actual written political philosophy of the Republican Party was its enthusiastic endorsement of Donald Trump.

---

This is lazy and "debunked".

Most people liked Trump's platform and policies, not his personality.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3198978

Malibu2 said:

---

It's like we live in a two-party dominated system that incentives both parties to prey on our worst impulses in search of the prize of governance.

There were two choices in the last election. Culture war vulgarity Turd A
Sandwich v Giant ******. Political philosophy choices Liberal v Conservative. I'm more comfortable with broad government investment than most as more than worth the cost. I vote for liberal turd sandwhich. You vote for Orange ****** conservative.

By much of this board's standards Trump was intolerable and beyond the pail. Then they got drunk on owning the libs, mirroring his behavior became more common, the obvious lies tolerated or overlooked because at least he's mean to libs. And a clear shift in tone, aggression, and courtesy followed. Me being to the left had always been sort of put up

---

So you voted for a man that is at the very least every bit the equal liar of Trump (in reality a much bigger liar than Trump) who is now the leader of a party whose entire ideology and methodology is based exclusively on lies?

I'm sorry, but in no way does Joe Biden hold any kind of moral high ground over Trump. He's a corrupt degenerate piece of trash that belongs nowhere near the Whitehouse.

I didn't see a lot of Christian leaders championing Biden like Robert Jeffress at First Baptist in Dallas . Of course Biden had to keep up appearances, as all politicians do related to religion. What was bizarre about Trump and continues to baffle me was how many good people, old church ladies I grew up around, fully bought into the lunacy that he was a good Christian choice for presidency. It was nonsense.

TXAGFAN said:

---

This will blow your mind, lots of us have kids and are pretty good parents. I won't say gay people want kids more than straight people, but not many straight couples stroke a 6 figure check for surrogacy and medical procedures to make that dream a reality.

---

More than you think. Not the surrogacy avenue, but lots of people in my circle of friends have adopted. I can count 11 families that adopted infants or fostered until adoption.

Not that it takes $100,000k per child, but it's easily 4 years and $50k.

BusterAg said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

As for DeSantis, why offer up a deplatforming judicial loser? What's the broader strategy if not to fight a culture war?

---

Take a step back from who currently controls the media, and the messages that are being blatantly suppressed.

Is blatant censorship and the silencing of contrary ideas a legitimate, ethical tool in a culture war fought within a free society? Is that really a constructive way to go as a society?

---

Well, January 6th had a hell of a lot to do with a Conspiracy Theorist in Chief rallying a social media mob and live streaming how they are beautiful people as they storm DC. At some point in time you can't enable that person to have a megaphone to use lies to destroy social order so that they can stay in power.

I'll say it, censorship of Trump post January 6th is absolutely ethically appropriate. He can't use force a private businesses to distribute conspiracy theory content that incites or approves of mobs raiding the Capitol. He can't destroy the will of the voters of some states on unproven crap lies. Yes, they can censor some voices that are damaging to our social trust in each other.

Tear Down This Wall said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

This is tired, the parties may have the same names as 50+ years ago, but their ideologies are wildly different. Only the gay rights issue is relevant to current history and no one has ever said the democrats were great allies before late 00's. Only one party continued and still continues the narrative that gay is bad.

---

It is bad. It's wrong, just like me lusting after women that aren't my wife.

The difference is I can take criticism for things I know are wrong but that I, as a man, am inclined to do. I fight those urges because I know that's what is best for me.

You don't, and demand people pat you on the back for it. You're weak. That's really all there is to it.

---

Yes I know because you believe my entire nature is sinful. so while your example is lusting after a woman who is not your wife I am to live a life of celibacy to meet your religious standard since anything I do is sinful under YOUR beliefs? Sorry that's supremely screwed up and hard to believe people think this way still, what kind of god would punish people like that.

TXAGFAN said:

---

No. I am a single issue voter for the most part re democrats. As much as I hate their stance on issues like economy I can't vote against my own basic rights for republican party and certainly couldn't for trump.

We will see how democratic executive/legislature handles the economy the next few years, but as a high earner I'm ok with paying more taxes. Republicans continue to seem obsessed with genitals and won't be giving that up anytime soon so don't see my vote changing.

You do you though...

Sidenote, I don't think Biden whitehouse has screwed really anything up yet. Agree or disagree with the vaccine, that improved dramatically. The border issues were a mess before Trump largely improved them more than any previous administration, where we actually had control of the border, and I don't give him a pass, but time will tell there too. Next 6-12 months will be the real story.

---

Hope that helps you; and wait for the inflation to fully kick in.

Malibu2 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

As for DeSantis, why offer up a deplatforming judicial loser? What's the broader strategy if not to fight a culture war?

---

Take a step back from who currently controls the media, and the messages that are being blatantly suppressed.

Is blatant censorship and the silencing of contrary ideas a legitimate, ethical tool in a culture war fought within a free society? Is that really a constructive way to go as a society?

---

Well, January 6th had a hell of a lot to do with a Conspiracy Theorist in Chief rallying a social media mob and live streaming how they are beautiful people as it was live-streaming. At some point in time you can't enable that person to have a megaphone to use lies to destroy social order so that they can stay in power.

I'll say it, censorship of Trump post January 6th is absolutely ethically appropriate. He can't use force a private businesses to distribute conspiracy theory content that incites or approves of mobs raiding the Capitol. He can't destroy the will of the voters of some states on unproven crap lies. Yes, they can censor some voices that are damaging to our social trust in each other.

---

Sounds like you're all for them banning the likes of most of the Democrat party, CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, WAPO, HuffPo, Salon, Vox, etc? There's the last five years of non stop lies that streamed out of those propaganda outlets in an effort to cause political unrest.

BusterAg said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

This will blow your mind, lots of us have kids and are pretty good parents. I won't say gay people want kids more than straight people, but not many straight couples stroke a 6 figure check for surrogacy and medical procedures to make that dream a reality.

---

More than you think. Not the surrogacy avenue, but lots of people in my circle of friends have adopted. I can count 11 families that adopted infants or fostered until adoption.

Not that it takes $100,000k per child, but it's easily 4 years and $50k.

---

Good for you? That wasn't my point. Every gay couple I know went surrogacy route and going rate is around $150k last I checked with a friend. adoption is a minefield for us and there is a current case I believe before Supreme Court related to this very issue re: discrimination in adoption processes related to religous agencies that receive govt funding. Trump administration wrote a brief supporting that practice by the way, since many keep saying they did NOTHING to harm gay people.

Edit: A link to Foxnews since I know this isn't in your "Trump was a pro-gay president" talking points

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-administration-proposes-hhs-rule-to-roll-back-lgbtq-protections-for-adoption-foster-care.amp

TXAGFAN said:

---

I didn't see a lot of Christian leaders championing Biden like Robert Jeffress at First Baptist in Dallas . Of course Biden had to keep up appearances, as all politicians do related to religion. What was bizarre about Trump and continues to baffle me was how many good people, old church ladies I grew up around, fully bought into the lunacy that he was a good Christian choice for presidency. It was nonsense.

---

You have to admit that you see Christianity through a different filter than most practicing believers.

Trump did champion a lot of Judeo/Christian/patriotic values.

1) Personal responsibility
2) Hard work
3) Self-sufficiency
4) Pro-life
5) Pro American worker
6) Pro American dream
7) Pro small business

Furthermore, he was not directly hostile to Christianity in many of his policies:
1) No CRT theory - advocated for colorblind society
2) Worked for peace between the West and the Middle East
3) Did not pander to Muslim terrorists', but blew them up.
4) Didn't talk down to Christians who should remove themselves from society so that they could clutch their Bibles and their Guns.

I think that there were very few people that didn't realize that Trump is a narcissistic *******. He just wasn't openly hostile to Christians, like most politicians, especially democrats.

Let's be honest, none of the left's champions are anything close to choir boys / girls.

Biden - father of the year, obviously has major health issues and is not physically fit for the job.
Pelosi - Drunk with power and vodka. Lots of vodka.
Coumo - Grandma murderer
Kamala - exactly the role model that mothers want to idolize to empower their daughters, right?

Malibu2 said:

---

It's like we live in a two-party dominated system that incentives both parties to prey on our worst impulses in search of the prize of governance.

There were two choices in the last election. Culture war vulgarity Turd A
Sandwich v Giant ******. Political philosophy choices Liberal v Conservative. I'm more comfortable with broad government investment than most as more than worth the cost. I vote for liberal turd sandwhich. You vote for Orange ****** conservative.

By much of this board's standards Trump was intolerable and beyond the pail. Then they got drunk on owning the libs, mirroring his behavior became more common, the obvious lies tolerated or overlooked because at least he's mean to libs. And a clear shift in tone, aggression, and courtesy followed. Me being to the left had always been sort of put up

---

That's a lot of words for saying "I voted for socialist policies and behavior/tone that I'm mostly against because I'm more comfortable with the Democrats and hate Trump's personality"

Pretending like the aggressive tone and shift started with Trump is laughable. Without people like you enabling the far-left during the Obama years ("at least he's owning the Republicans")...Trump probably never runs for office. His candidacy never happens. He never wins office and triggers you with his mean tweets.

One can just as easily argue the dems got drunk on "owning Trump" and their voters started mirroring their behavior.

aggieforester05 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

As for DeSantis, why offer up a deplatforming judicial loser? What's the broader strategy if not to fight a culture war?

---

Take a step back from who currently controls the media, and the messages that are being blatantly suppressed.

Is blatant censorship and the silencing of contrary ideas a legitimate, ethical tool in a culture war fought within a free society? Is that really a constructive way to go as a society?

---

Well, January 6th had a hell of a lot to do with a Conspiracy Theorist in Chief rallying a social media mob and live streaming how they are beautiful people as it was live-streaming. At some point in time you can't enable that person to have a megaphone to use lies to destroy social order so that they can stay in power.

I'll say it, censorship of Trump post January 6th is absolutely ethically appropriate. He can't use force a private businesses to distribute conspiracy theory content that incites or approves of mobs raiding the Capitol. He can't destroy the will of the voters of some states on unproven crap lies. Yes, they can censor some voices that are damaging to our social trust in each other.

---

Sounds like you're all for them banning the likes of most of the Democrat party, CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, WAPO, HuffPo, Salon, Vox, etc? There's the last five years of non stop lies that streamed out of those propaganda outlets in an effort to cause political unrest.

---

This may surprise you, but potentially yes. But I would add to that list Fox, Newsmax, and OAN as right wing propaganda media as much as those voices are left wing propaganda.

How to deescalate and reverse tribalize our news is an important social order. We must all be able to trust certain sources to credibly and without bias report uncomfortable facts we all agree on. I do not know how to do sensible reform that doesn't have potential 1st amendment consequences. Maybe bring back the fairness doctrine? I don't know.

TXAGFAN said:

---

I'm no fan of trump, but neither were 80 million other people. Republicans need to bring moderates back to party, telling people who have switched their votes up in the last 10 years they are wrong with NO support for that point of view is not a way to bring them back into the fold.

---

Trump got more votes than Obama ever did. Trump did not lose "the moderates."

Malibu2 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

As for DeSantis, why offer up a deplatforming judicial loser? What's the broader strategy if not to fight a culture war?

---

Take a step back from who currently controls the media, and the messages that are being blatantly suppressed.

Is blatant censorship and the silencing of contrary ideas a legitimate, ethical tool in a culture war fought within a free society? Is that really a constructive way to go as a society?

---

Well, January 6th had a hell of a lot to do with a Conspiracy Theorist in Chief rallying a social media mob and live streaming how they are beautiful people as they storm DC. At some point in time you can't enable that person to have a megaphone to use lies to destroy social order so that they can stay in power.

I'll say it, censorship of Trump post January 6th is absolutely ethically appropriate. He can't use force a private businesses to distribute conspiracy theory content that incites or approves of mobs raiding the Capitol. He can't destroy the will of the voters of some states on unproven crap lies. Yes, they can censor some voices that are damaging to our social trust in each other.

---

At least you're honest here...instead of the false "centrist" image you try and portray in other posts. You support censorship of people you don't like...and justify it with false accusations to make it sound reasonable.

I think freedom of speech is what makes this country great. Censoring someone just because your side hates them politically and wants to make them look as bad as possible isn't a reason to infringe on freedom of speech.

Funny, you want to go out of your way to make it seem like Trump incited a riot...yet you're silent on the dems encouraging protest behavior that's turned violent and wanting any of their leaders censored.

LOL nm, this conversation just got too crazy. Congrats on your "getting more votes than Obama" and still losing.

Malibu2 said:

---

aggieforester05 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

As for DeSantis, why offer up a deplatforming judicial loser? What's the broader strategy if not to fight a culture war?

---

Take a step back from who currently controls the media, and the messages that are being blatantly suppressed.

Is blatant censorship and the silencing of contrary ideas a legitimate, ethical tool in a culture war fought within a free society? Is that really a constructive way to go as a society?

---

Well, January 6th had a hell of a lot to do with a Conspiracy Theorist in Chief rallying a social media mob and live streaming how they are beautiful people as it was live-streaming. At some point in time you can't enable that person to have a megaphone to use lies to destroy social order so that they can stay in power.

I'll say it, censorship of Trump post January 6th is absolutely ethically appropriate. He can't use force a private businesses to distribute conspiracy theory content that incites or approves of mobs raiding the Capitol. He can't destroy the will of the voters of some states on unproven crap lies. Yes, they can censor some voices that are damaging to our social trust in each other.

---

Sounds like you're all for them banning the likes of most of the Democrat party, CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, WAPO, HuffPo, Salon, Vox, etc? There's the last five years of non stop lies that streamed out of those propaganda outlets in an effort to cause political unrest.

---

This may surprise you, but potentially yes. But I would add to that list Fox, Newsmax, and OAN as right wing propaganda media as much as those voices are left wing propaganda.

How to deescalate and reverse tribalize our news is an important social order. We must all be able to trust certain sources to credibly and without bias report uncomfortable facts we all agree on. I do not know how to do sensible reform that doesn't have potential 1st amendment consequences. Maybe bring back the fairness doctrine? I don't know.

---

I agree with this, but disagree that Trump is somehow more dangerous and worthy of censorship than the degenerate Democrats whose rhetoric contributed to the last four years of Antifa/BLM violence/destruction. Playing up Jan 6th (as disgusting as it was) as somehow worse than the culmination of BLM/Antifa riots is just Democrat posturing and disgusting to say the least. The double standards are only creating a bigger political divide and have to stop!

I think that's a fair point. The left got off too easy with an unruly mob situation and should be held more accountable.

Malibu2 said:

---

Gigem314 said:

---

\ said:

---

If you want to argue political philosophy, make those arguments. I'd love to discuss why Universal Pre-K through JC, Infrastructure, Paid Parental Leave, and Single Payer Healthcare are the right direction to go as a nation than whether or not politicians create political theatre out of electoral self-interest.

---

No, you just want to point out the political theater on one side while dodging having to defend it from your own side. The Democrats have engaged in a lot more of it these past few months and past 4 years than anything DeSantis has done. But he's the new threat to your side, so you have to speak against him.

---

I called out Kavenaugh, ongoing mask mandates, wokism, MSM "fine people on both sides" propaganda, etc. I'm done ignoring it from my side out of convenience. The left has an onerous, anti-liberal wing that must be stopped. I just don't want to stop it with Trumps army.

---

I'm with you here.

I think, if you could take a step back from trying to demonize 80 million people that voted for Trump, you would find that you have more in common with them than you realize.

I would welcome a return to the days when politics didn't have so much vitriol. I am 100% supportive of all democrats that want to reign in the looney left.

The good news is that in about 2.5 years, a lot of us are all going to be on the same side against them due to the upcoming runaway inflation that is going to make everyone's lives miserable.

Malibu2 said:

---

I think that's a fair point. The left got off too easy with an unruly mob situation and should be held more accountable.

---

Yet people like you won't do it. You'll call out Trump by name, and call for his censorship...while supporting Biden and the people around him who embraced the heated "get in their faces" rhetoric.

An empty "Man that's a shame they should be held accountable" means absolutely nothing when you enable it.