228
this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
228 points (94.9% liked)
politics
19080 readers
3562 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If all you find to attack someone on is their physical appearance then you might as well just shut up... There's plenty to criticize Republicans for.
So I'll start the GoFundMe with a meager donation of $5.
Any contributions from the morally superior ones on the audience?
It's not the only thing, it's just funny that on top of being ugly on the inside, so many of them fall squarely into uncanny valley on the outside too. It's an interesting pattern to observe. Now quit shaming people for speaking their minds on a casual discussion forum. They aren't hurting anybody.
Stop normalizing attacking people based on their physique, no matter where it's done there's nothing ok about it and you wouldn't accept it if it was an attack coming from the other side towards someone you appreciate.
I don't attack people who don't make a name for themselves by hurting others.
You aren't in any position to gatekeep me or my speech. I appreciate the moral apprehension to join in, you're encouraged to not join.
You're not here to teach me a lesson let alone anyone else here, keep that in mind 🫶
Then attack them on what they did, not on what they look like. Attacking people based on their appearance just shows that you don't have anything better to attack them on either because they're actually right or because you don't know enough to present a more compelling argument against them, in which case, as I said, you might as well just shut up.
Are we not allowed or capable of having nuanced, diverse thought about a person? There's certainly more than one thread in these replies...
Nobody is saying she's bad because she's ugly, just that she's ugly. You can draw those conclusions if you're bad faith, but they're obviously faulty conclusions that are more like what a parent tells their bullied child to make them feel better than anything politically sound.
This isn't the senate floor, this is lemmy. Maybe that guy doesn't care that much about the politics, maybe they do. We can't really tell from this comment alone. Regardless, they have just as much a right to be here as you do. So, you "just shut up" first lol and learn how to use a period while you're at it.
I'm sure if it was someone you liked your would be in agreement with me, that's the problem with these attacks, they have no value and disagreeing with them is as simple as saying what I've been saying from the get go "If that's all you have then clearly that person must be right."
If you think it's a good thing to lower yourself to their level to attack them then you're no better than them.
Suck it up, buttercup.
Lol no I wouldn't be. It's a silly line of attack to get upset over. Depending on the person I'd tell them they're wrong and/or they have other merits and move on with my life.
You are more than welcome to disagree and have a discussion about it but shutting down and telling them to shut up is not the right way to go about it.
And if she's going to preach an ideology for everyone else that makes it a moral failing to be unattractive then she should be the first one to die by her own sword. Quit playing defense for fascists.
Not all just the tip of the iceberg but funny none the less