y’all. people are allowed to have opposing viewpoints on here. Just because we disagree doesn’t automatically mean J has to splat them.
@Armchaircouch Call me intolerant of endorsing bigotry and hatred. 🤷
I agree that Trump has shown hatred, for instance, towards our immigrants. But I would also argue that most politicians are complete bigots.
Don’t get me wrong I think he’s a rapist and should be in prison for that and treason, I’m just simply saying that there are other human beings in America that don’t see him that way, and Im not sure it’s in the TOS to kick people off because they have an opinion on a politician. @SaltyVeruca
@Armchaircouch It's J's house. His decision. I do me. He runs the house. The rest of it is argument for sheer sake of gray area which I refuse to debate. By the way, if people don't "see him" that way, factually, they're delusional and have the wrong agenda.
Exactly right. I blocked rather than reporting, although I think they will quickly escalate to the point of earning a report from someone. It's not like they're here for an actual discussion.
ik. so lame because why even bother spend the time, you know? @ceorl
@Armchaircouch @ceorl unnecessary energy drain.
@Armchaircouch I have no problem with opposing viewpoints, provided 1) they're presented civilly, and 2) backed by demonstrable facts. That being said, I do have limits. If you support a wannabe fascist dictator who proposed nuking Afghanistan and having the military shoot peaceful protesters, among other lovely traits, then there's nothing to discuss - auto block. Those folks do not live in this universe; thus, there's no basis for communication.
@Armchaircouch True Kat. But bear in mind, viewpoints are one thing. I know there are people on the right here and some are good friends, but their politics are incidental to their interactions. They don't make literally every single post an inflammatory one 💜 👍