MAGA Hats

[appleman2006]

So do you understand why conservatives may feel that they have lost some of their freedoms? Also do you understand why a person's freedom that results in someone else being hurt, i.e. abortion rights, could be seen as dangerous?

I do understand how and why conservatives feel the way they do. I think that people generally have a right to their feelings. I also don’t agree with the conservative perspective.

What does “freedom” mean to you? Who gets to have freedom? Who in society decides which freedoms should matter and which freedoms should be repressed?

Well since you asked. Freedom to me means that people get to live, practise and teach the ideals they believe in providing that it does not harm themselves or others. Freedom can and should legitimately be restricted when there is proven evidence that the practise of it will be harmful especially to others but also to oneself.

As you can see I am a long way from a libertarian. I understand that the argument often is in what defines harm to oneself. But even that argument is not nearly as complicated if we are honest about it and are willing to take an honest look at it. What baffles me is that the left is almost always on board with efforts to control danger to physical harm to people (exceptions to this are abortion and euthanasia) but when it comes to things that might affect the moral and spiritual state of people they scream in horror at the very thought of such controls.

[Robert]

What does “freedom” mean to you? Who gets to have freedom? Who in society decides which freedoms should matter and which freedoms should be repressed?

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Freedom to choose to be stupid too. It is very hard to legislate intelligence or morality, yet the fed tries to do both.

[GaryK]

So do you understand why conservatives may feel that they have lost some of their freedoms? Also do you understand why a person's freedom that results in someone else being hurt, i.e. abortion rights, could be seen as dangerous?

I do understand how and why conservatives feel the way they do. I think that people generally have a right to their feelings. I also don’t agree with the conservative perspective.

What does “freedom” mean to you? Who gets to have freedom? Who in society decides which freedoms should matter and which freedoms should be repressed?

A question I have been thinking about to go along with this is - what metric can we use to determine if these freedoms are being repressed?

[Josh]

So do you understand why conservatives may feel that they have lost some of their freedoms? Also do you understand why a person's freedom that results in someone else being hurt, i.e. abortion rights, could be seen as dangerous?

I do understand how and why conservatives feel the way they do. I think that people generally have a right to their feelings. I also don’t agree with the conservative perspective.

What does “freedom” mean to you? Who gets to have freedom? Who in society decides which freedoms should matter and which freedoms should be repressed?

To me, freedom means being an innocent baby that is free to not be murdered with state support by your parents and the medical profession.

The opposite of freedom is slavery, where some human lives are treated as worthless and killed with impunity. During the slavery era in America, wealthy southerners complained their “freedom” to enslave other people was being lost. The liberal left is no different today.

[temporal1]

i’m not sure the notion of “freedom” has ever before been so conflated with entitled, subsidized, protected, fed, housed, educated, as it presently is, along-with abundant free time to protest, trespass, vandalize, complain, demand, sue. did i omit anything? ..
.. make up hoaxes to damage others, to inflate yourself.

the freedom to pursue happiness has morphed into the idea of demanding happiness. and material comforts. or, else.

the U.S. is now an obtuse culture wherein millionaires, with straight faces, claim to be victims.
(i suppose) because, “victim” status is now so highly rewarded. people compete to prove they are the biggest victims. this is where the money+power is, for a lot of people.

this is not a healthy development. but it’s real.

Not sure where this is going to end:
“Jussie Smollett: True hate crime or another hoax?”
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/20 ... _hoax.html

.. Wrath is the sin that fuels anti-Trumpers' feeling of perverse vindication when they hear that something terrible has happened and it coincides with their own philosophies.

Then a complete lack of humility is present when it turns out to not be as bad as they first thought or even hoped.

Stepping on someone else's sad story as a soapbox to virtue-signal is distasteful.
To do so without even confirming the story's authenticity is ignorance.

Being unable to re-evaluate when the story is proven false is dangerous.

[DrWojo]

3E26CF72-5246-4DB9-8D19-A1A0D119151D.jpeg (469.48 KiB) Viewed 403 times

[Valerie]

So do you understand why conservatives may feel that they have lost some of their freedoms? Also do you understand why a person's freedom that results in someone else being hurt, i.e. abortion rights, could be seen as dangerous?

I do understand how and why conservatives feel the way they do. I think that people generally have a right to their feelings. I also don’t agree with the conservative perspective.

What does “freedom” mean to you? Who gets to have freedom? Who in society decides which freedoms should matter and which freedoms should be repressed?

A question I have been thinking about to go along with this is - what metric can we use to determine if these freedoms are being repressed?

I listen to Christian radio- periodically, David Gibbs from the Center of Law & Justice will come on sharing a particular case where one's freedom has been attacked by the powers that be- and him being a lawyer- (and I assume his team) will then defend those whose freedoms are being repressed and by using the Constitution & laws- will interpret it and that person normally will get that 'freedom' back.

[Josh]

And let’s not forgot the pro-homosexual federal government and their malicious prosecution of Zodhiates, trying to put him behind bars.

At one point the federal government was trying to prosecute Liberty University Law School and put them out of business. The Deep State, liberal-progressives, the left, and pro-homosexual lobby don’t want there to be any lawyers left who are Christians.

Meanwhile, the left whines and cries about Kavanaugh (a political moderate) being a Supreme Court justice, simply because he’s Christian and he won’t be guaranteed vote pro-abortion and pro-homosexual.

[temporal1]

Page 6:

Szdfan:
.. “I also don’t agree with the conservative perspective. ” ..

this seems an odd thing to say. “the” conservative perspective?
i suppose, i would say i don’t agree with extremes - of any perspective.
my sense is, the majority on this forum respond in this way.

today, extremes are routinely attributed.
if/when they become the controlling factors, then, that makes some sense.

A. for instance, when obama+hillary embrace abortion as a primary party platform, when there was no requirement for this, other than pressures from lobbies .. to me, this is extreme. because obama+hillary are the top party leaders, this cannot be dismissed as “some fringe members.”

in my mind, premeditated, for-hire murder of innocents is extreme.

aborted victims are not criminals, they are not waging war. (both are questions for Christians.)
abortion is an affront to human morality, including Christians, but not limited to Christians;
human morality cannot include premeditated, for-hire murder of innocents; murder is almost universally illegal. few exceptions. (Neto knows of some exceptions.)

B. some view President Trump’s commitment to a border wall as extreme. i’m ambivelant.

Christians can exist with a wall. so can others. no debate, the world is filled with walls.
physical wall or no wall, it changes very little or maybe nothing for Christians. on any side of any wall.

there are a myriad of examples, but these 2 are presently in the forefront.

for politics, people are being groomed to see various things as extreme.
but, are they? how so? who decides?

[temporal1]

Page 4, Jan 30:

Another rush to judgment so soon after the Sandmann Phillips event? - Shame on us.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/42800/ac ... osh-hammer

Several media outlets referenced claims that appeared in TMZ's coverage of this matter, most notably that the perpetrators were white and yelled "this is MAGA country," as they attacked Smollett. But a spokesperson for the Chicago police denied having any information about the race and political views of the attackers.

"According to the victim, the offenders' faces were concealed," a police spokesperson told Reason. "We have no record indicating that [they shouted 'MAGA'], we only have record of them shouting racial and homophobic slurs at him."

Chicago police have also released a statement contradicting claims that Smollett identified his attackers' race and heard them shout "MAGA."

"We have no record of The MAGA Country comment," said the police in a statement. "We have racial and homophobic comments documented."

LOTS of media noise on this since Jan 30. Most reports are, claims were a planned HOAX.
Jussie, the claimed victim, now has a high-profile DEFENSE attorney, will be brought before a Grand Jury.

Al Sharpton responds:
“Al Sharpton, Civil Rights Activists, Say Jussie Smollett Should be Arrested if Attack Was Fake“
https://www.ntd.com/al-sharpton-civil-r ... 90521.html

.. Al Sharpton was among the civil rights activists who said Smollett should face legal consequences if he was involved in staging the alleged attack.

“If it is found that Smollett and these gentlemen did in some way perpetrate something that is not true, they ought to face accountability to the maximum,” he said on MSNBC on Feb. 17. ..