Ok, but the reality is, as long as the rich are regularly taking corporate jets, and we know government’s not going to act on it, why would John/Jane Q. Public cut their own waste? It’s going to make their lives measurably worse without real benefit to them or climate change. I understand why one might, but we are not going to convince enough more people to “do the right thing” to make a difference if that’s the argument.

Way to leave out trans people.

If queerness is a social club defined by the people in it, no.

If queerness is a political identity due to legal persecution for “deviant” consenting adult sexual behavior outside of public view, yes.

Romantic? Ffs…

Would you accept giving someone a choice between life in prison and death?

If you think prison’s worse than death for an innocent person, feel free to ask people who were exonerated after decades in prison if they’d rather have been killed.

If you imprison an innocent, they can be freed. Execution takes away that possibility. And we have absolutely, provably, executed innocent people. I hope that never happens to you, but if life were a play, it would certainly make for some dramatic irony.

Human medical experimentation on prisoners is cruel and unusual in and of itself. However well you personally think execution by nitrogen would go (and I doubt you’d volunteer), people on death row have a right to know we’re not trying novel execution methods on them. Maybe if what we’re doing doesn’t actually benefit anyone more than prison would and is considered so barbaric that European manufacturers won’t supply us with the drugs we need to do it, we should stop.

The mania for execution led Arizona to refurbish its gas chamber and reverse-engineer a Zyklon B equivalent.* That’s not the kind of country I want to live in. How about you?

*https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/28/arizona-gas-chamber-executions-documents

Yes. Statisticslly speaking, it means more hotties. And the opinions of bigots aren’t going to run my life.

Gayly.

They learned the wrong lessons for this war from the previous one.

Authoritarianism is not always fascism, even if I did accept your premise. Fascism isn’t just “governments I don’t like.” Perhaps read some political philosophy before coming in with metaphorical guns blazing?

Here’s a link to Ur-Fascism, to start. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/umberto-eco-ur-fascism

The virus is out. The only decision now is how we respond.

“Surely no one would ever do such things again. It’s in the barbaric past.”

Meanwhile, Arizona fixed their gas chamber for executions recently and basically reverse-engineered Zyklon B for it. (It’s real. Look it up.)

Bad comparison. Ireland wasn’t an invading, occupying power. They were trying to reclain their country from the British empire…and they didn’t even get all of it. I smell a troll.

Not having civilized discourse with people whose political goal is to wipe me and those I love from the face of the earth. Also, “civilized discourse” requires at least two parties who are capable of such a thing.

The question of whether something should be a law should always consider: “Is this worth using violence to enforce?”

They were taught their whole lives that violence is always wrong. That it’s never the correct solution. They can’t concieve of it being the only way out. When you trust liberals to run an education system, you get people with ingrained useless liberal ideas.

*To be clear, using “liberal” from a leftist perspective.

Bringing back 1950s racial politics would be evil, but I’m pretty sure that even under the loosest definition, it’s not genocide. See, the idea was to oppress and use black people intergenerationally, not wipe them or even all their cultural practices from the face of the earth. Want to use the word “genocide” to make a political statement on the attempted democide of trans people? Go nuts. But check your definitions. There are lots of kinds of evil.

My husband’s gf and he and I watch new Star Trek together (in person or over Zoom) every week as a lil ritual. It’s lovely.

I was responding to the previous comment, not OP. OP was saying conservatives get upset when people won’t sleep with them because they’re conservative. From the text of the comment I responded to, it looks like the person is saying “moderates” just don’t care about anyone but themselves. I’m adding that often the people the actual OP is talking about pretend to be the moderates the previous commenter is discussing.

Eh, sometimes it means another thing, namely that they know their conservatism is off-putting to most women and they’re lying to get you into bed.