21
Recent Posts
22
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by markjo on July 16, 2025, 12:55:02 AM »The Constitution doesn't say whether it can be taken away or not. Anything not in the Constitution is for the government to decide. It also doesn't say that Citizenship is a right, like the right to free speech and the right to bare arms. If it were a right it would have been explicitly described that way with the other rights. Instead, it merely outlines who qualifies for citizenship.Perhaps you should take another gander at the 14th amendment:
Fourteenth Amendment
Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
It says that if you're born in the US, then you are a citizen. That sounds like a right to me. On the other hand, citizenship through immigration is a privilege that can be revoked under certain conditions. If the constitution doesn't say that birthright citizenship can be revoked, then you shouldn't assume that it can.
This whole Rosie O'Donnell nonsense is just that, nonsense. It's just another attempt to distract from the Epstein fiasco.
23
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by Tom Bishop on July 16, 2025, 12:20:30 AM »Being granted a license isn't a guarantee that you get to keep the license regardless of how you conduct yourself. Being granted a certificate of land ownership isn't a guarantee that you get to keep the land forever, regardless of how you conduct your finances or eminent domain considerations. There are a hundred examples where designations are not permanent.I don't think there's any controversy there. Yes, of course there are situations where citizenship can and should be revoked.
But someone being an outspoken criticism of the leader of a country isn't one of them. You're supposed to be a democracy in which people have free speech.
Removing people who criticise the administration is a bit...dictatory.
Come on, dude, you surely see there are dangers here. Although all that said it doesn't sound like Trump actually has unilateral power to do this, so there are some checks and balances.
That's not the reason Trump gave for why Rosie O'Donnell should be stripped of citizenship. Stop making things up.
The keyword is that someone is granted citenship.Citizenship is a right granted by the constitution, therefore only the constitution can revoke citizenship. Please show me where the constitution outlines the process for revoking citizenship.
The Constitution doesn't say whether it can be taken away or not. Anything not in the Constitution is for the government to decide. It also doesn't say that Citizenship is a right, like the right to free speech and the right to bare arms. If it were a right it would have been explicitly described that way with the other rights. Instead, it merely outlines who qualifies for citizenship.
24
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by Dr Van Nostrand on July 15, 2025, 09:20:36 PM »honk still claiming Clinton to be a centrist.
Wow.
No one is fooled by the approach of the ilk claiming Trump to be absolutely terrible, all the while he is continuing the US down the path of the exact things you totalitarians desire.
The guy is a lifelong liberal.
As horrifying as Bill Clinton may be, at least we now know with certainty that he didn't go to any of Epstein's parties. Trump says it's all a hoax, just a bunch of lies. In fact, he's going to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell. It was just Epstein by himself trafficking girls from himself to himself. Clinton, Prince Andrew, Michael Jackson were publicly dog-piled with these salacious Epstein rumors by hateful people jealous of their public success.
But, Trump has been playing 4D chess all along. By pretending to believe in the list and by claiming Clinton was on the list, he could get into a position of power to safely reveal that the list doesn't exist. something like that...
I'm sure we'll have it Magasplained shortly.
25
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by Action80 on July 15, 2025, 06:48:39 PM »honk still claiming Clinton to be a centrist, denying his sexual predation that took place at his own office with an assigned intern is somehow not a clear statement of his political ideology. It damn sure is and I don't give a flying fuck whether anyone here agrees or not.
Wow.
No one is fooled by the approach of the ilk claiming Trump to be absolutely terrible, all the while he is continuing the US down the path of the exact things you totalitarians desire.
The guy is a lifelong liberal.
Wow.
No one is fooled by the approach of the ilk claiming Trump to be absolutely terrible, all the while he is continuing the US down the path of the exact things you totalitarians desire.
The guy is a lifelong liberal.
26
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by Lord Dave on July 15, 2025, 04:30:14 PM »They might even make an amendment to prevent presidents from having such immunity to begin with.Yeah but if Dems get back in power, revenge time.
Like, the next dem president could execute Trump at the inauguration for reasons of him being a domestic threat, arrest and deport every maga member, deny allowing any voting to be secret ballot, then, to top it all off, have ICE protect itself by killing any protesters.
Which is all the apparent power Trump now has. Or he assumes he does.
No, a Democratic president would be held to account if they tried to exceed their power so blatantly. The Supreme Court would rule against them, Congress would impeach them, public support would drop to nothing, etc.
Which would be the point.
27
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by honk on July 15, 2025, 04:25:49 PM »Yeah but if Dems get back in power, revenge time.
Like, the next dem president could execute Trump at the inauguration for reasons of him being a domestic threat, arrest and deport every maga member, deny allowing any voting to be secret ballot, then, to top it all off, have ICE protect itself by killing any protesters.
Which is all the apparent power Trump now has. Or he assumes he does.
No, a Democratic president would be held to account if they tried to exceed their power so blatantly. The Supreme Court would rule against them, Congress would impeach them, public support would drop to nothing, etc. I suspect that a Republican president would also face the appropriate consequences, as there's no other high-profile conservative I'm aware of with the charisma to keep Trump's cult of personality going, although it's hard to say for sure given the GOP's embrace of cynicism and abandonment of democratic ideals.
And there's no point in arguing with Action80. He keeps moving the goalposts every time someone points out to him that his argument is nonsense. His last argument was that politicians passing laws on the subject of what Clinton did was what made it a direct reflection of his political ideology. Now his argument seems to be that the affair happening in the workplace was what made it a direct reflection of Clinton's political ideology. If I provided counter-examples of the hundreds of other inappropriate or illegal things people can do at the workplace that presumably don't reflect their political ideology, he'd change his mind yet again and insist that it actually came down to something completely different. There's nothing to be gained by debating someone who's acting in bad faith.
After the 'pussy grabbing', crypto scams, insults to our war veterans, subverting our democracy, and aligning with autocrats, it's good to see that at least some Republicans will draw the line at child sex trafficking.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/14/trump-maga-epstein-bondi-bongino-00451114?cid=apn
Live by the conspiracy, die by the conspiracy.
This will blow over, just like the hundred or so other scandals that would have ended the career of any other politician have blown over. Trump's fans don't care about child sex trafficking, just like they don't care about the fact that he's a corrupt con man, an incompetent idiot, a rapist, and a deeply foul, sleazy man who exhibits just about every negative quality a single person could have. Trump's fans care about Trump, and they will never, ever abandon him. Not even Trump's eventual death will put an end to their overwhelming devotion and loyalty to him.
28
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by Dr Van Nostrand on July 15, 2025, 01:05:42 PM »After the 'pussy grabbing', crypto scams, insults to our war veterans, subverting our democracy, and aligning with autocrats, it's good to see that at least some Republicans will draw the line at child sex trafficking.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/14/trump-maga-epstein-bondi-bongino-00451114?cid=apn
Live by the conspiracy, die by the conspiracy.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/14/trump-maga-epstein-bondi-bongino-00451114?cid=apn
Live by the conspiracy, die by the conspiracy.
29
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by Lord Dave on July 15, 2025, 12:52:28 PM »Yes, although I am not sure where you garner Trump has engaged in sexual acts while at the workplace.So Trump is a totalitarian, by your logic?Claiming acts of driving and tax payments are somehow analogous to acts of banging an intern at the office
That's not what I said...
No, that is exactly what you said.
One can only take that you were placing yourself in Clinton's shoes by stating whether your driving habits or an honest or dishonest filing of taxes was a gauge of your political idealogy. First of all, you are nothing at all similar to Clinton in terms of position, power, or fame. B, nobody gives flying fuck what you do.
Those two acts have nothing to fucking do with the goddamn workplace and your introduction of them is typical of the fucking bullshit you post.
Engaging in sexual acts in the workplace, especially when one is in a clear position of power over the other, is a totalitarian act.
The last one to hold office that was not was shot.
After he recouped, he ceased further attempts for fundamental change.
Ronald Reagan?
30
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by Action80 on July 15, 2025, 12:49:53 PM »Yes, although I am not sure where you garner Trump has engaged in sexual acts while at the workplace.So Trump is a totalitarian, by your logic?Claiming acts of driving and tax payments are somehow analogous to acts of banging an intern at the office
That's not what I said...
No, that is exactly what you said.
One can only take that you were placing yourself in Clinton's shoes by stating whether your driving habits or an honest or dishonest filing of taxes was a gauge of your political idealogy. First of all, you are nothing at all similar to Clinton in terms of position, power, or fame. B, nobody gives flying fuck what you do.
Those two acts have nothing to fucking do with the goddamn workplace and your introduction of them is typical of the fucking bullshit you post.
Engaging in sexual acts in the workplace, especially when one is in a clear position of power over the other, is a totalitarian act.
The last one to hold office that was not was shot.
After he recouped, he ceased further attempts for fundamental change.