You don’t have to imagine. Just ask a question: why would a court release someone with an immigration detainer on them?

Now, if you’re so inclined, you can research that answer. No imagination required!

the law that determines citizenship. Not identifying.

Which is funny, because these folks are probably more American than I am.

Companies that buy single-family homes say their businesses provide renters the opportunity to live in desirable neighborhoods where they otherwise couldn’t afford to buy.

That’s true, because companies buying SFHs make it unaffordable to buy homes in desirable neighborhoods. They are the solution to the problem they created.

Eran_Morad: Warning for violation of Rule #1.

This is clearly false, but let’s assume it’s true…how is this different DeSantis’s own dumping of immigrants into Martha’s Vineyard?

There is nothing in the article that supports the headline. As far as I can tell, it’s just another way of saying ‘Americans are worry about the economy’.

I’m specifically worried about jobs, though. We need more jobs with better conditions and higher taxes on them. That sounds like a recipe for disaster, but that’s only true if we continue to allow the 1% to own more than the entire middle class. An excess of private wealth necessarily leads to an excess of public squalor.

All the science agrees; being sexually attracted to children isn’t something a person has control over, any more than a person can choose to be straight.

Okay, does it really say this? Where?

Always go to the study!

The disparity between red and blue states has little to do with anything Biden has done, experts interviewed by ABC News said, noting that federal policy typically holds minimal influence over state-by-state economic trends.

Instead, they added, the dynamic owes in large part to the appeal of warm weather states for workers and businesses, as well as the combination of company-friendly state policies and Democrat-leaning cities that attract young, educated workers.

Warm weather and Democrat-leaning cities are responsible for economic growth in red states.

Or on the flip side

"Dating back to when the president took office, he has enacted a set of historic legislative accomplishments that have very directly driven the historic labor market recovery and historic economic growth we’ve had,” Daniel Hornung, deputy director at the National Economic Council, a Biden administration group that advises the president, told ABC News.

Moreover, Hornung rebuked the notion that Biden’s policies have little to do with the particularly strong performances among red states, citing** legislative achievements that, in some cases, have disproportionately benefited red states. ** Biden’s legislative accomplishments are responsible for economic growth in red states.

OR, on even a third side, somehow…

“Presidents don’t really have a lot to do with state economic performance,” Terry Clower, a professor of public policy at George Mason University, told ABC News.

Instead, experts said that relatively strong red state performance results in part from business-friendly policies and attractive weather.

But George Mason University is basically a conservative school, so he would say something like that.

So what?

Do you think the solution to mis-/dis-information is censorship or otherwise attempting to marginalize what you believe are “garbage and lies”? What makes his arguments invalid? Which of his statements are false and lies? How do you know? And why are you definitely right and why is he definitely wrong?

There’s this really interesting humans do. We become convinced of some viewpoint, whether through reason or, more likely, uncritical acceptance of some framework. It’s the right viewpoint. We assume others must also share our viewpoint. The truth is obvious to us. So disagreement is often treated as lies. The one who disagrees knows the truth, but chooses to say otherwise. They’re nefarious, despicable, and disrespectful for their duplicity in the face of an obvious truth.

But here’s the thing: people genuinely hold beliefs different than you. What you see as “faulty, intentionally dishonest foundations” can only be true if you are of the mind of Pizzamane and can definitively say he believes in something else entirely. You must have the mind of Pizzamane. Unless you’re really a psychic, you cannot do that. He may actually believe the foundations of his beliefs and you’ve been wrong this whole time. You can’t know that’s true either.

So what to do?

As hard as it might be, you have no choice but to except Pizzamane and other liberals and leftists at face value. You can consider our beliefs as garbage all you want. But leftists have every right to participate in this community, just as you do. And, I assure you, we often consider your beliefs garbage. When we disagree, then we should argue about the arguments, the statements and conclusions.

In short, he, or anyone else for that matter, will not be banned by me as long as they bring arguments. (…and don’t tell people to fuck off…😠)

If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person wereof the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.—John Stuart Mill

NewPerspective

Warning. Violation of Rule #1.

Your post was 100% until that very, very last line.

That was found unconstitutional, too.

Originalism strikes again!

By using the Bruen ruling, the judge can ignore that very real safety issues of drug users getting guns, and just say “Well, drug tests weren’t historically required for getting a gun. And today is the same as the era of the Thirteen Colonies, so, they should still have fun! I mean, guns!”

Originalism as a legal doctrine is incredibly stupid. It basically boils down to 'We can have everything nice they had in early American history and no more! Don’t like them apples? Probably shouldn’t have been born in…modern America, where embryos are children, which wasn’t true in early American history!"

Yeah…I’m curious as to how this is going to go. It’ll be interesting, that’s for sure.

Am I totally misunderstanding what is being said here?

You are not.

So, I know where you’re coming from because I’ve read stuff by Edmund Burke and other conservatives. But, unless the conservative you’re talking with is the intellectual type, they probably haven’t. They’ve probably just internalized some version of social conservatism but would also be appalled that you’d accuse them of supporting social stratification even as they support it.

I learned some time ago that this particular argumentative strategy is incredibly pointless. They don’t care that you know the historical and philosophical foundation of their beliefs. For them, that foundation isn’t there for them. They probably don’t know it! Their life experiences inform them more than anything else.

Noncitizens aren’t totally barred from voting in San Francisco. In 2016, after multiple attempts in previous years to pass a similar measure, voters approved Proposition N, which allowed San Francisco noncitizens to vote in school board elections if they had a child who went to school in the district.

What’s wrong with voting in school board elections?

Momo: Violation of rule #1 and #3.

This isn’t merely disagreeing with someone. Telling someone to “shove this gun grabber shit” up their ass is just disrespectful.

Boba

Warning: Violation of rule #1 and #3

If they don’t clarify, don’t put words in their mouth.

PrincessEli: Warning for violation of rule #1 and #3.

Don’t automatically assume something is beyond someone’s mental capability, and provide reasons for your disagreement.

(I’m gonna have to start putting names in my warning so I know how I’ve warned previously…)

The Parable of the Good Samaritan:

29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

Jesus is too liberal for y’all. Definitely don’t go and do likewise.