The Question that Makes Cowards out of Leftists

[Evmetro]

How many leftists will own up to approving of the killing of a living human who has committed no crime and who has expressed no desire to die?

How many leftists will own up to approving of said killing if the justification is to make some third living human's life more convenient?

The title of your thread suggests that lefties might be cowards when it comes to this question, so I am wondering how many lefties so far have answered your question without being cowards?

 

[StoneByStone]

Please provide two examples of Trump's racism.

Saying a Mexican judge couldn't do his job and saying the Squad should go back to their countries.
To be fair, I don't think Trump is actually racist. I think he just pretends to be in order to get the Alt-Right support.

 

[Evmetro]

Saying a Mexican judge couldn't do his job and saying the Squad should go back to their countries.
To be fair, I don't think Trump is actually racist. I think he just pretends to be in order to get the Alt-Right support.

Yep, here you go pulling the race out of racism in order to frame Trump as a racist for his comments about his fellow white guy.

And here you go trying to make it sound like races come from geographic places with you goon squad crap. You are such a bigot for implying that going back to one's country has something to do with one's race.

 

[IBDaMann]

Here we come back to the brain dead patient whose heart still beating. We've come around the circle again.

Because you insist in returning. The brain-dead patient is alive which is, as you pointed out, why we say that he is being "kept alive." The question then becomes whether that patient has expressed a desire to die, e.g. via a DNR. If not then you can't pull the plug.

Are we done on this or do you still have questions?

 

[IBDaMann]

In the colloquial sense, it refers to when people try to obfuscate the point by nitpicking words and definitions.

Nope. The word means what it means. It only takes on the meaning you descrobe when embarrassed illiterates try to blame others for their own confusion.

For example, a common way the Trumpcucks here defend Trump's racism is by saying the groups he attacks aren't technically races, so it's not racism.

There are many problems with your statement.

1. Your assumption that Trump is racist is discarded. You have not established in any way.
2. Yes, racism can only be levied against a race. You are obviously very gullible to allow yourself to believe otherwise.
3. You reveal that, yes, you are certain to blame others for your own confusion.

Have we covered everything?

 

[IBDaMann]

You've been sipping too much Clorox.

You've been spending too much time in the dark recesses of your safe-space.

 

[IBDaMann]

I don't believe it should be legal to kill an innocent person.

You had one job and one job only, i.e. to answer the question without changing the words. Unfortunately you answered a question I did not ask. My question contains neither the word "innocent" nor the word "person."

In order to strip out any possible weaseling by ANYBODY and to eliminate any possible "gotchas" ... I was very deliberate with the wording.

Do you believe it should be legal to kill a living human who has committed no crime and who has not expressed any desire to die? How does your answer change if said killing clearly makes some other living human's life more convenient?


Additional clarification:

"Living" is defined by the medical and biological axiom "If there is a heartbeat then there is life" ... thus a brain-dead person with a heartbeat is considered "alive." The first thing any medical professional does is to check for a pulse. No fauna with a heartbeat is ever considered "dead"

"Human" is defined as being of the species Homo Sapiens and is determined by DNA. A human infant is not a puppy ... the DNA establishes this beyond any doubt.

The expression of a desire to die could be the mentioning of suicidal thoughts, a signed DNA, ... whatever.

But this appears to be a gotcha question.

My question is a straightforward hard-n-fast "yes" or "no" question. You should have no trouble taking a hard-n-fast "yes" or "no" stand.

 

[IBDaMann]

Saying a Mexican judge couldn't do his job and saying the Squad should go back to their countries.

It's a court of law. One says whatever one needs to say to win.

Question: Did Trump end up having to pay $40 Million + punitive damages + court costs? ... or did he force a 63% settlement ($25 Million) + no punitive damages + no court costs?


In sports, players taunt opposing players to throw them off their game, to get them riled, to get them to start fights and to get ejected. It's part of the game. It's part of competition.

I'm guessing that you were never really competitive in sports.

To be fair, I don't think Trump is actually racist.

So you were just wasting bandwidth?

I think he just pretends to be in order to get the Alt-Right support.

Has it ever occurred to you that there is no such thing as the "alt-right" ... that your gullibility is once again being played like a Steinway? Did it never occur to you that your political slavemasters were just stroking your fears of a fictitious "enemy"?

It would appear that your eagerness to believe absolutely ANYTHING explains why you regurgitate the WACKIEST crap. And here I am with free tickets to front row seating.

 

[StoneByStone]

Yep, here you go pulling the race out of racism in order to frame Trump as a racist for his comments about his fellow white guy.

And here you go trying to make it sound like races come from geographic places with you goon squad crap. You are such a bigot for implying that going back to one's country has something to do with one's race.

Yeah, yeah, the Nazis weren't racist, we get it.

 

[IBDaMann]

The title of your thread suggests that lefties might be cowards when it comes to this question, so I am wondering how many lefties so far have answered your question without being cowards?

Thus far I have gotten a lot of EVASION.

AProudLefty has been willing to discuss the issue. I'm trying to get him to stop modifying the wording and morphing the question into something else, but he's been pretty stand-up about it.

He's about the only one. Cowards like ThatOwlCoward naturally can only respond by lashing out in fear with petty personal attacks. It's all they can do until their political slavemasters tell them in what manner they are authorized to respond.

*

 

[StoneByStone]

It's a court of law. One says whatever one needs to say to win.

In sports, players taunt opposing players to throw them off their game, to get them riled, to get them to start fights and to get ejected. It's part of the game. It's part of competition.

I totally agree. Trump doesn't really hate Mexicans, Arabs, or Blacks. He only pretends to because it helps his career.
When I say "Trump's racism," I'm talking about the racism he's using. I'm not saying he actually believes his own propaganda.

Has it ever occurred to you that there is no such thing as the "alt-right" ... that your gullibility is once again being played like a Steinway? Did it never occur to you that your political slavemasters were just stroking your fears of a fictitious "enemy"?

Wait.... your argument here is that people like Richard Spencer and Mike Enoch don't actually exist?
I must say, I've heard lots of conspiracy theories in my day, but this is one of the strangest.

 

[IBDaMann]

Yeah, yeah, the Nazis weren't racist, we get it.

Well, well, ... look who can't make an argument without fabricating his own bogus position to assign to others.

Wouldn't it be easier to just tip your king?

 

[IBDaMann]

I totally agree. Trump doesn't really hate Mexicans, Arabs, or Blacks. He only pretends to because it helps his career.

He doesn't even pretend to. Your assumption is discarded. Unfortunately, that gets your whole argument tossed.

When I say "Trump's racism," I'm talking about the racism he's using. I'm not saying he actually believes his own propaganda.

There isn't any racism ... especially none that you have submitted into evidence. You have failed to establish a prima facie case and your claim will be summarily thrown out unless you come up with something.

Wait.... your argument here is that people like Richard Spencer and Mike Enoch don't actually exist?

Is this another bogus position that you are fabricating? ... this time for the purpose of assigning it to me? Whoever taught you that this is somehow a winning strategy did you a major disservice.

I must say, I've heard lots of conspiracy theories in my day, but this is one of the strangest.

Considering that you fabricated it, your self-praise seems rather petty.

 

[StoneByStone]

Well, well, ... look who can't make an argument without fabricating his own bogus position to assign to others.

Actually, Evmetro really did say the Nazis weren't racist.
He doesn't want to admit that Trump's hate speech against Mexicans is racism, so he pretends that it doesn't count because Mexicans aren't considered a race by the American Census. I pointed out that by his logic, the Nazis weren't racist either. He agreed.
So there you go, that's how desperate Trumpcucks are to deny Trump's racism.

 

[StoneByStone]

There isn't any racism ... especially none that you have submitted into evidence. You have failed to establish a prima facie case and your claim will be summarily thrown out unless you come up with something.

I gave you two examples. Your reply was that Trump was just trying to win a court case. Fine, he was acting racist to win the case.
My argument here is not that he's racist, it's that he acts racist.

Is this another bogus position that you are fabricating? ... this time for the purpose of assigning it to me? Whoever taught you that this is somehow a winning strategy did you a major disservice.

Considering that you fabricated it, your self-praise seems rather petty.

You said the Alt-Right doesn't exist. So how do you explain all of these Alt-Right figures?

 

[IBDaMann]

You said the Alt-Right doesn't exist.

... that you have shown. I don't even know what this "alt-right" supposedly is. My only clue is that you throw it around like a slur.

Question: Am I in/on/over the "alt-right" myself? If so, is that based solely on my having said something positive about Donald Trump? Is the term "alt-right" simply a result of Leftist TDS being stroked?

This term "alt-right" only came into existence when Donald Trump announced he was running for President. On the surface, it appears you are being tooled. The only "alt-right" organizations are ones that paranoid leftists call "alt-right" ... again, in the manner of it being a slur. Otherwise there are no organizations that bill themselves as "alt-right" organizations of which I am aware. TEA Party organizations existed and identified themselves first as "TEA Party" organizations. "Alt-right" organizations appear to be a figment of your imagination, something you have been ordered to believe.

Also, I notice that those who use the term "alt-right" all fall for the same staged photos, e.g.:

i.e. the use of the term "alt-right" is a sign of some gullible tool who is very proud of being manipulated.

So how do you explain all of these Alt-Right figures?

What is an "alt-right figure"?

 

[IBDaMann]

Actually, Evmetro really did say the Nazis weren't racist.

I'll take your word for it. In that case I withdraw my comment with my apologies.

He doesn't want to admit that Trump's hate speech against Mexicans is racism,

1. There is no such thing as "hate speech." In the United States we have free speech.
2. Trump did not hurl any slurs at Mexicans. If you believe he did, post the video ... just don't waste bandwidth by posting Trump's correct claim that some illegal aliens are rapists.

Just post the video right here in your response.

... so he pretends that it doesn't count because Mexicans aren't considered a race by the American Census.

Let me get this straight ... you consider Trump to be a racist just because you never learned that Mexico is a country? How is your confusion anyone else's fault?

I pointed out that by his logic, the Nazis weren't racist either. He agreed.

If Evmetro claimed or implied that NAZIs weren't racist then you were right to correct him. The NAZIs were not simply bigots ... they were in power and unleashed racism on steroids, on the order of intended multiple genocides, e.g. Jews, Gypsies, Russians, others.

There are no more NAZIs. That political party is still illegal in Deutschland. However you have motivated me to start a new thread on NAZIs. It's a fascinating topic.

By the way, NAZIs are leftists, specifically socialists. NAZIs are Marxist. If you knock them you are knocking the left, not the right. The left has always been about slavery and racism. The Republican Party was established to end slavery. Democrats persist with their slavery by enslaving the gullible.


.

 

[Evmetro]

Actually, Evmetro really did say the Nazis weren't racist.
He doesn't want to admit that Trump's hate speech against Mexicans is racism, so he pretends that it doesn't count because Mexicans aren't considered a race by the American Census. I pointed out that by his logic, the Nazis weren't racist either. He agreed.
So there you go, that's how desperate Trumpcucks are to deny Trump's racism.

Provide the quote of me claiming that the Nazis were not racists.

 

[Evmetro]

Yeah, yeah, the Nazis weren't racist, we get it.

What are you basing your claim that "Nazis are not racists" on?

 

[AProudLefty]

Because you insist in returning. The brain-dead patient is alive which is, as you pointed out, why we say that he is being "kept alive." The question then becomes whether that patient has expressed a desire to die, e.g. via a DNR. If not then you can't pull the plug.

Are we done on this or do you still have questions?

We are not done until you understand.