Your argument is insane. For example, I would never, ever, ever expect a Jewish person to vote for a politician who is exterminating Jewish children, even if I could make a rational argument that their opponent is worse for Jewish people.
You need to contend with fundamental human nature and you need to recognize that the Democratic Party for the past 13 months has acted beyond the moral pale. They have violated the red moral lines drawn by the world since 1945 and have done so with pride and sometimes caprice.
Being petulant towards people who could not bring themselves to vote for a genocidaire, and treating their very human revulsion and horror as petulance, marks you as an untrustworthy person who is unserious about human rights or liberal values.
You may be surprised to learn that Bibi wasn’t on any ballots anywhere in the US.
You did have the option of voting for Harris who wants to pressure Israel into a cease fire or trump who wants Israel to finish off the Palestinians faster.
So, like the other guy already said, if you didn’t vote for the one option who wanted to rein in the murder and also had a chance of getting more than 1% of the vote, you’re an “untrustworthy person who is unserious about human rights or liberal values.”
Likening to an abstract hypothetical moral problem is very appropriate to the way you people think. At the end of the day politics for you is a lever you pull every few years and the catharsis or disappointment involved.
By the way, kindly save your “I told you so” and “trolley problem” bullshit for after Trump has allowed Israel to slaughter a larger number of children than Biden did for the past 13 months.
kindly save your “I told you so” and “trolley problem” bullshit for after Trump has allowed Israel to slaughter a larger number of children than Biden did for the past 13 months.
Why wait? What happens then, you wave a magic wand and all of a sudden it’s rainbows and lollipops?
What happens then is that I will be responding to a moral argument based in facts, and not a fucking hypothetical that may as well be an excuse for genocide. If in 13 months the Trump administration has aided Israel in the slaughter of another 100,000 children, we can start talking about how voting Democrats as “damage mitigation” is a duty to humanity. Until then I will try my best to assume you’re making the argument in good faith and that you truly believe that ending genocide is a moral priority.
Lol Trump was extremely happy to take part in the SuperGenocide in Yemen. If you think Biden’s aid for the Gaza attack is bad, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
The only people who voted for the genocidaire I would consider to be engaging in serious harm mitigation are those who also use every other means afforded to them to stop the genocide. As for the people who have little to say about the fact that they have been presented two genocidaires as presidents - and even less to do - you’re even more grotesque when you invoke human rights.
Your argument is insane. For example, I would never, ever, ever expect a Jewish person to vote for a politician who is exterminating Jewish children, even if I could make a rational argument that their opponent is worse for Jewish people.
You need to contend with fundamental human nature and you need to recognize that the Democratic Party for the past 13 months has acted beyond the moral pale. They have violated the red moral lines drawn by the world since 1945 and have done so with pride and sometimes caprice.
Being petulant towards people who could not bring themselves to vote for a genocidaire, and treating their very human revulsion and horror as petulance, marks you as an untrustworthy person who is unserious about human rights or liberal values.
You may be surprised to learn that Bibi wasn’t on any ballots anywhere in the US.
You did have the option of voting for Harris who wants to pressure Israel into a cease fire or trump who wants Israel to finish off the Palestinians faster.
So, like the other guy already said, if you didn’t vote for the one option who wanted to rein in the murder and also had a chance of getting more than 1% of the vote, you’re an “untrustworthy person who is unserious about human rights or liberal values.”
Record breaking ovations and applause for him in Congress, so why should I care?
So you’re either a liar or a moron, huh.
So when faced with a trolley problem, always just let it do whatever
Likening to an abstract hypothetical moral problem is very appropriate to the way you people think. At the end of the day politics for you is a lever you pull every few years and the catharsis or disappointment involved.
By the way, kindly save your “I told you so” and “trolley problem” bullshit for after Trump has allowed Israel to slaughter a larger number of children than Biden did for the past 13 months.
Why wait? What happens then, you wave a magic wand and all of a sudden it’s rainbows and lollipops?
What happens then is that I will be responding to a moral argument based in facts, and not a fucking hypothetical that may as well be an excuse for genocide. If in 13 months the Trump administration has aided Israel in the slaughter of another 100,000 children, we can start talking about how voting Democrats as “damage mitigation” is a duty to humanity. Until then I will try my best to assume you’re making the argument in good faith and that you truly believe that ending genocide is a moral priority.
Lol Trump was extremely happy to take part in the SuperGenocide in Yemen. If you think Biden’s aid for the Gaza attack is bad, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
Id counter that and say if you didn’t vote you would be “unserious” about human rights
The only people who voted for the genocidaire I would consider to be engaging in serious harm mitigation are those who also use every other means afforded to them to stop the genocide. As for the people who have little to say about the fact that they have been presented two genocidaires as presidents - and even less to do - you’re even more grotesque when you invoke human rights.