Why BLM does have a point.

[Dab]

I understand this, but he is also referring to individuals that are Conservative. Would you please provide some sources of these conservative pundits being "anti-science"? I do not disagree that there are those from both political parties, republican and democratic, that deny scientific and proven facts, but it would be nice to be provided with some of this "historic denial" of science.



It's simple logic really. I would think a person of your intellect would be able to comprehend my explanation. Guess you are just a pseudo intellect after all.



But I am being completely coherent. It's not the hard to understand my logic.



The fact that human beings are given birth to by other human beings does not confirm scientific theories of how the universe was created, let alone disprove the existence of a God or higher-power. This is a null argument.



Try reading the previous comments, buddy. You will then see I was quoting Confluency and Cohen.



It's alright. By now I understand that your idiocy is making it hard to comprehend basic statements.



My argument is not denying this though. My argument is that it is not an immediate threat as the left/liberal media is making it out to be.



Sources please.



Oh sure you do. If you are going to claim that something is bad or good, I expect that you give reasoning to why it is so. This is why you are bad at debating.

Go watch TV for evidence.


You didn't explain how religion isn't anti-science because you claim religion "simply" says god exists, it proposes a lot more than "simply" that.

Faith is a null argument... I'm glad you can see that.



You just write incoherently and don't follow a train of thought, so of course people aren't going to understand you...



LOL you want sources for evidence climate change is right now effecting the world. I mean besides the fucking obvious higher acidic oceans. rising sea levels and literal GLOBAL WARMING... here you go

https://www.vice.com/read/photographi...nd-communities
https://news.vice.com/article/its-be...g-this-quickly
https://news.vice.com/article/even-g...le-are-melting

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ing-sea-levels


fucking


how much evidence do you need? I realize a scientific argument would be over your head but this is physical evidence.

[PTMartin]

So we have left BLM and are trying to figure out who is more unscientific? Cool.

The Liberals' War on Science:

If conservatives have declared a war on science, then progressives have declared Armageddon. On energy issues, for example, progressive liberals tend to be antinuclear because of the waste-disposal problem, anti–fossil fuels because of global warming, anti hydroelectric because dams disrupt river ecosystems, and anti–wind power because of avian fatalities. The underlying current is “everything natural is good” and “everything unnatural is bad.” Solar is of course the be all end all of clean energy for the liberal. To bad it's so damn expensive, expensive to store, and unreliable. Unless of course you get the government to subsidize it by taking money from some people and giving it to others.

The left is fixated on the environment, leading to an almost religious fervor over the purity and sanctity of air, water and especially food. Try having a conversation with a liberal progressive about GMOs—genetically modified organisms.

Modern environmentalism perpetuates myths about the inorganic world and the evils of Big Pharma. It’s adherents are just as likely to be in conflict with settled science as anyone else. Thus we end up with the liberal leaning anti-vaxers.

Did I miss anything? Wonder how much science matters to BLM folks?

[Dab]

So we have left BLM and are trying to figure out who is more unscientific? Cool.

The Liberals' War on Science:

If conservatives have declared a war on science, then progressives have declared Armageddon. On energy issues, for example, progressive liberals tend to be antinuclear because of the waste-disposal problem, anti–fossil fuels because of global warming, anti hydroelectric because dams disrupt river ecosystems, and anti–wind power because of avian fatalities. The underlying current is “everything natural is good” and “everything unnatural is bad.” Solar is of course the be all end all of clean energy for the liberal. To bad it's so damn expensive, expensive to store, and unreliable. Unless of course you get the government to subsidize it by taking money from some people and giving it to others.

The left is fixated on the environment, leading to an almost religious fervor over the purity and sanctity of air, water and especially food. Try having a conversation with a liberal progressive about GMOs—genetically modified organisms.

Modern environmentalism perpetuates myths about the inorganic world and the evils of Big Pharma. It’s adherents are just as likely to be in conflict with settled science as anyone else. Thus we end up with the liberal leaning anti-vaxers.

Did I miss anything? Wonder how much science matters to BLM folks?

Go look at COP21 videos of the lobbyists, they're all conservative.

Also how about we have a conversation about GMOs then, that's a liberal idea. Liberals are against the traditional, it's traditional not to have GMOs, any so claimed liberal against GMOs is taking a conservative stance.

This is why I ignored you, and that other guy. You're both lunatic alts most likely.

[Confluency]

So we have left BLM and are trying to figure out who is more unscientific? Cool.

The Liberals' War on Science:

If conservatives have declared a war on science, then progressives have declared Armageddon. On energy issues, for example, progressive liberals tend to be antinuclear because of the waste-disposal problem, anti–fossil fuels because of global warming, anti hydroelectric because dams disrupt river ecosystems, and anti–wind power because of avian fatalities. The underlying current is “everything natural is good” and “everything unnatural is bad.” Solar is of course the be all end all of clean energy for the liberal. To bad it's so damn expensive, expensive to store, and unreliable. Unless of course you get the government to subsidize it by taking money from some people and giving it to others.

The left is fixated on the environment, leading to an almost religious fervor over the purity and sanctity of air, water and especially food. Try having a conversation with a liberal progressive about GMOs—genetically modified organisms.

Modern environmentalism perpetuates myths about the inorganic world and the evils of Big Pharma. It’s adherents are just as likely to be in conflict with settled science as anyone else. Thus we end up with the liberal leaning anti-vaxers.

Did I miss anything? Wonder how much science matters to BLM folks?

You literally just went on a bullshit ridden rant that honestly holds zero fucking truth.

The enviorment is important, liberals realize this. You seem to have no fucking understanding that this time we are currently living in is so extremely important in regards to how the planet will be like in a few decades. Yes, global warming is a fucking danger and needs to be addressed. As a matter of fact, I'd say it's probably THE most important issue right now.

Do you have any understanding that rising sea levels will literally annihilate entire coastal areas? It's already happening to pacific Islands.

That ground water hundreds of millions of people drink from their fucking tap? Well under your proposed belief of "lol its not an immediate threat" you can say goodbye, as rising sea levels will saline ground water and make it unsafe for human consumption.

Remember that California drought? Picture that in a few decades on a nation wide scale.

Like storms? It's proven with increased Global warming natural disasters like storms increase because of the weather. Billions of dollars of damagetting! (Also, if you know anything about Republicans and their stances on funding natural disaster relief, you'd find this very ironic lol).

Don't understand how Global Warming creates more energy for natural disasters? Here's a summary.

Heat drives everything in our climate system. Heat causes water to evaporate, from both soil and open water, into the atmosphere more quickly, and it also lets the air hold more water.

Heat causes air to become less dense, which causes air to flow more often, as high pressure regions dump into lower pressure areas.

Heat causes ocean waters to move as the temperatures makes the water less dense, too. Storms feed off of latent heat. Heat pushes polar air out, counter-intuitively causing colder temperatures in some regions and stronger winters.

Heat is energy. With more of it, our climate will do more of everything it already does now, plus if any of the "tipping point" estimates turn out to be real we'll have those to deal with as well.

You're kinda right, some liberals really do have extreme views on enviormentalism. But you know what I find funny? Their views atleast have some sort of fucking reason calculated into them. The right wing simply says fuck it, increase coal production! Destroy every effort done by enviormentalists during the past decade! Fuck the enviorment!

And how do I draw the conclusion that right wingers don't give a fuck about the enviorment? I read those who they fucking elect into office's views on enviormental issues.

Arguing against Global Warming being a non-serious issue right now is laughable, and almost every country would agree. I know this because for the first time in history over 200+ countries came together during the Paris agreement and finally agreed to something, reducing emissions.

People lie, facts don't.

[PTMartin]

Also how about we have a conversation about GMOs then, that's a liberal idea. Liberals are against the traditional, it's traditional not to have GMOs, any so claimed liberal against GMOs is taking a conservative stance.

Wait, so let me get this straight, if a liberal believes something bad, it's because he's really a conservative? Perfect! That explains everything! Liberals can do no wrong!

This is why I ignored you, and that other guy. You're both lunatic alts most likely.

Ad hominem fallacy. Great debate strategy!

The enviorment is important, liberals realize this. You seem to have no fucking understanding that this time we are currently living in is so extremely important in regards to how the planet will be like in a few decades. Yes, global warming is a fucking danger and needs to be addressed. As a matter of fact, I'd say it's probably THE most important issue right now.

Here's an idea: how about we let scientists, you know, do science shit, and leave politics out of it. You want to live off the grid? Super, cut the cord and go for it. Enjoy your self satisfaction of your 'smaller footprint'. You afraid of the evils of GMO, great, go have your heirloom onions and feel safe. You against the evils of big pharma, skip the vaccine and have fun dealing with measles, polio, etc. Just don't come around anyone else. Oh wait, liberals don't want to just do their own thing, they have to make everyone else do what they think in their infinite wisdom is the right way to live.

Do you have any understanding that rising sea levels will literally annihilate entire coastal areas? It's already happening to pacific Islands.

Cool. People inland get to have beachfront property. People have had to deal with climate and weather since the beginning of time. Somehow we've managed to survive. Imagine that! A species that adapts and migrates from less favorable conditions to more favorable conditions.

(Also, if you know anything about Republicans and their stances on funding natural disaster relief, you'd find this very ironic lol).

Of course, forcibly take stuff from some people and give it to others. How utterly compassionate and fair!

You're kinda right, some liberals really do have extreme views on enviormentalism. But you know what I find funny? Their views atleast have some sort of fucking reason calculated into them. The right wing simply says fuck it, increase coal production! Destroy every effort done by enviormentalists during the past decade! Fuck the enviorment!

I knew we'd get to this: Yeah, liberalism is unscientific, but hey it's still a good thing! Important too!

I know this because for the first time in history over 200+ countries came together during the Paris agreement and finally agreed to something, reducing emissions.

This is one reason liberals have politicized science and in particular global warming. It's a perfect rationale to push the real agenda which is economic redistribution.

[Dab]

Wait, so let me get this straight, if a liberal believes something bad, it's because he's really a conservative? Perfect! That explains everything! Liberals can do no wrong!

Click to view ignored post, then you say this. You apparently are more ignorant than I originally thought.

Conservatives uphold tradition
Liberals disregard traditional values

Every liberals goal is to create a conservative bill in the future. Does that go over your head even after I gave you the definition? I'm betting it does.... Liberals want to progress society while conservatives want to uphold the past. If I pass a bill that in decades from now is upheld due to working so good, then it's turns conservative.

Now, GMOs are something NEW. Genetically modifying your food, is fundamentally a liberal position. Even if some liberals oppose genetically modified food, that quite literally does not reflect liberals in any way shape or form. They are taking a moderate stance by wanting organic food, the way food used to be for thousands of years...

Now I'm placing you back on ignore for being ignorant. If you want to debate with me you need to know what you're talking about to begin with.

[Confluency]

Here's an idea: how about we let scientists, you know, do science shit, and leave politics out of it. You want to live off the grid? Super, cut the cord and go for it. Enjoy your self satisfaction of your 'smaller footprint'. You afraid of the evils of GMO, great, go have your heirloom onions and feel safe. You against the evils of big pharma, skip the vaccine and have fun dealing with measles, polio, etc. Just don't come around anyone else. Oh wait, liberals don't want to just do their own thing, they have to make everyone else do what they think in their infinite wisdom is the right way to live.

This logic is so

You've disillussioned yourself into thinking everything is just "Liberal propaganda", so what you're really trying to do here is not debate the actual points on why global warming is an issue, but try and push some political conspiracy theory as "fact".

Most liberals aren't anti-GMO, or are really that stringnat on enviormental issues. We just acknowledge there is a problem, and also acknowledge that we need to address this problem. Are there people on the far-left who are so delusional that think we should cut ourselves off the grid and completely protect the enviorment? Yeah.

But lumping every enviormentalist into that group who also be like if I said every conservative who wants total freedom in regards to gun access are just maniacs who want to have easy access to shoot whoever the want.

It's simply incorrect to think that, but what I do think is you have an inkling that what you're saying is incorrect, and instead of arguing the facts you take the argument into a different direction. "lol dah liberals try and push their rhetoric on us lol let us destroy the world with no repercussion"

You're wrong, and that's it. You haven't provided anything with substance.

Cool. People inland get to have beachfront property. People have had to deal with climate and weather since the beginning of time. Somehow we've managed to survive. Imagine that! A species that adapts and migrates from less favorable conditions to more favorable conditions.

This logic is so simple minded it's hilarious. "We adapt, so instead of keeping our living conditions almost the same as before, let's just fuck it all up and find a way to adapt!"

Your sarcasm is also noted, and once again no substantive argument is made to try and debate tbe actual point.
Saying we "adapt" isn't an answer. It's a cop-out. Almost trump-like.

Of course, forcibly take stuff from some people and give it to others. How utterly compassionate and fair!

Oh look, a commonly shared belief among conservatives where "if its my problem, then it's not a problem!"

Unfortunately for you, empathetic values are shared amongst the people. Sorry you have to pay a few extra dollars to keep someone whos entire life was destroyed housed for a while. Fuck em right?

I knew we'd get to this: Yeah, liberalism is unscientific, but hey it's still a good thing! Important too!

Oh look, another point you made with no substance and doesn't argue what I said! Almost like how to entirely ignored the point I made about natural disasters increasing causing billions of dollars of damage, thus making global warming an immediate theat! Something you denied earlier!

This is one reason liberals have politicized science and in particular global warming. It's a perfect rationale to push the real agenda which is economic redistribution.

Those pesky liberals right? Making strides to bring the world together to solve one of the most important issues we have! I can't believe these Liberals are trying to push their agenda! For example I can't believe China and Russia took part in the Paris agreement! Those fucking communist liberals!

We went from talking about how BLM isn't exactly a terrorist organization, to how conservatives elect those into positions of power who share anti-science beliefs, and now we are debating if Global Warming is an issue. Are you going to bring up that you think 9/11 was an inside job? Or how about we debate if the government is hiding aliens? Aliens created the pyramids? Atlantis? Obama Is a muslim?

[PTMartin]

Every liberals goal is to create a conservative bill in the future.

Wait, what? Liberals want to be conservatives when they grow up? Cool. Why not just grow up sooner and adopt the adult mindset now?

Now, GMOs are something NEW. Genetically modifying your food, is fundamentally a liberal position. Even if some liberals oppose genetically modified food, that quite literally does not reflect liberals in any way shape or form.

I knew we'd get to this: Yeah, liberalism is unscientific, but hey it's still a good thing! Important too! Oh and a bonus for, "That's just a few bad ones, it doesn't reflect on ALL liberals..." Yet somehow the a few anti-evolution nuts means all conservatives are anti-science. Thanks for the clarification!

Most liberals aren't anti-GMO, or are really that stringnat on enviormental issues.

Cool. And most conservatives aren't anti-science, they just don't want science politicized to take away a persons choice.

This logic is so simple minded it's hilarious. "We adapt, so instead of keeping our living conditions almost the same as before, let's just fuck it all up and find a way to adapt!"

Like I said, if you want to go off the grid thinking you're saving the world, go for it. Sadly you don't want others to have the freedom of choice.

Your sarcasm is also noted, and once again no substantive argument is made to try and debate tbe actual point.

The actual point is whether you want to force others to conform and comply with what you think should be done about your latest environmental cause or disaster, or whether people should have a choice. Not whether global warming is real. Start a thread to debate the science of that if you want to.

Oh look, a commonly shared belief among conservatives where "if its my problem, then it's not a problem!"

Oh look, a commonly shared belief among liberals where "if its my problem, then it's your problem, and here's what I demand you do about it!"

See how that works? Why to you hate freedom?

Unfortunately for you, empathetic values are shared amongst the people. Sorry you have to pay a few extra dollars to keep someone whos entire life was destroyed housed for a while. Fuck em right?

Fuck those that FORCE people to contribute to charity. Why to you hate giving the freedom of people to help others as they the see fit? If your idea of helping is so great, why is there a need to force people at the end of a gun to do it?

Oh look, another point you made with no substance and doesn't argue what I said! Almost like how to entirely ignored the point I made about natural disasters increasing causing billions of dollars of damage, thus making global warming an immediate theat! Something you denied earlier!

You might want to pay attention to the thread and who says what. I never debated global warming with you or the "theat".

We went from talking about how BLM isn't exactly a terrorist organization, to how conservatives elect those into positions of power who share anti-science beliefs, and now we are debating if Global Warming is an issue.

Want to know how we got here, so off topic? Here's how:

You Forgot How The Gop Funds The Private Prisons/Jails/Probation Systems, The Democrats Do Too But Not Nearly As Much As The Republicans.

Oh And They're Anti-Science, Mostly Religious, And Tend To Lack A Formal Education.

See, when people can't keep up with the debate, have no rational, logical response they start pulling in off topic crap and using ad hominem fallacies.

Kinda like you did here:

Are you going to bring up that you think 9/11 was an inside job? Or how about we debate if the government is hiding aliens? Aliens created the pyramids? Atlantis? Obama Is a muslim?

It's you and your pal that took us off course, and with your obsession with global warming continued to push the topic off course. But hey, if you want to get back to BLM, it's up to you.

[Dab]

Wait, what? Liberals want to be conservatives when they grow up? Cool. Why not just grow up sooner and adopt the adult mindset now?



I knew we'd get to this: Yeah, liberalism is unscientific, but hey it's still a good thing! Important too! Oh and a bonus for, "That's just a few bad ones, it doesn't reflect on ALL liberals..." Yet somehow the a few anti-evolution nuts means all conservatives are anti-science. Thanks for the clarification!




Cool. And most conservatives aren't anti-science, they just don't want science politicized to take away a persons choice.



Like I said, if you want to go off the grid thinking you're saving the world, go for it. Sadly you don't want others to have the freedom of choice.



The actual point is whether you want to force others to conform and comply with what you think should be done about your latest environmental cause or disaster, or whether people should have a choice. Not whether global warming is real. Start a thread to debate the science of that if you want to.



Oh look, a commonly shared belief among liberals where "if its my problem, then it's your problem, and here's what I demand you do about it!"

See how that works? Why to you hate freedom?



Fuck those that FORCE people to contribute to charity. Why to you hate giving the freedom of people to help others as they the see fit? If your idea of helping is so great, why is there a need to force people at the end of a gun to do it?



You might want to pay attention to the thread and who says what. I never debated global warming with you or the "theat".



Want to know how we got here, so off topic? Here's how:


See, when people can't keep up with the debate, have no rational, logical response they start pulling in off topic crap and using ad hominem fallacies.

Kinda like you did here:



It's you and your pal that took us off course, and with your obsession with global warming continued to push the topic off course. But hey, if you want to get back to BLM, it's up to you.

I knew you wouldn't be capable of understanding how everything liberals today pass will become conservative bills / policies in the future.

No fallacies, I'm not making an attack, I'm stating actual facts about conservatives. For the most part they've been against climate change regulations all around the world, they are without a doubt more religious simply because they are "conservative", and there was a ****** done on conservative voters that shown 3/4 of the people polled did not have a formal education.


Again, not responding to your posts anymore. I can see you aren't capable of upholding a sound debate due to your lack of interest in learning anything. Bye

[Confluency]

Cool. And most conservatives aren't anti-science, they just don't want science politicized to take away a persons choice.

Science needs to be "politicized" simply because that's how regulations are put forth. You're "freedom" fucking cop-out is outplayed. Why don't I have freedom to go and rob a store? Why can't I kill someone? Stop politicizing my morals! I should be able to do what I want!

As previously said, ConservatIves elect people into office who share anti-science views. If you're choosing people who deny science to represent you, what else should I call you? Go look up Kasich, Trump, Carson, Rubio, and Cruz's views on their views on scientific issues. It doesnt take much to conclude they are share very similiar standpoints. Most are deny evoluton, climate change, vaccines, and tons of other issues. You have freedom to do what you want to a fucking extent. Get over it.

Like I said, if you want to go off the grid thinking you're saving the world, go for it. Sadly you don't want others to have the freedom of choice.

As previously said, you have freedom to an extent. We don't live an a black and white world.

The actual point is whether you want to force others to conform and comply with what you think should be done about your latest environmental cause or disaster, or whether people should have a choice. Not whether global warming is real. Start a thread to debate the science of that if you want to.

I didn't change the subject of debate, I joined in. Besides, I find the BLM debate childish and I only partook in it because there isn't much debate in other threads.
Once again you've disillusioned yourself into thinking you've drawn the "true conclusion" of my point. You're trying to read between the lines of something you can't. My point is Global warming is an issue (which I guess wasn't directed to you, but from what I'm reading you still think that your freedom impedes on science) and that conservatives elect those who are anti-science,showing that they support anti-science rhetoric. End of story.

Oh look, a commonly shared belief among liberals where "if its my problem, then it's your problem, and here's what I demand you do about it!"

See how that works? Why to you hate freedom?

Why does freedom impede on the betterment of the human race? As said before, your freedom is to a certain extent. If we had true freedom we would be able to murder, rape, steal without repercussion. You're cries of "muh freedom" are childish.

Fuck those that FORCE people to contribute to charity. Why to you hate giving the freedom of people to help others as they the see fit? If your idea of helping is so great, why is there a need to force people at the end of a gun to do it?

Nobody is forcing anything, thats why we elect people who share our views and standpoints. You don't think taxes should go towards so and so, and you hate being forced to do something? Elect someone who agrees with you. Kind of conservatives elect anti-science politicians.

Whining about "I shouldnt have to do this! Muh freedom!" Is fucking stupid.

Freedom would let Pharmacies make drugs cost millions of times more, Freedom would let me walk into your house and rob you, Freedom would let me do whatever I want. So as I have said before, you have freedom to a certain fucking extent. And crying "freedom" when people are making strides to prevent conservative fucks from destroying the enviorment is definitely not going to stop anything.

Kinda like you did here:

That was done to imitate the sarcasm you've been using every post. I'll act just as immature while still raising my points.

[PTMartin]

I knew you wouldn't be capable of understanding how everything liberals today pass will become conservative bills / policies in the future.

Yep, your brilliant logic of, "liberals are right about stuff, which is why we must always support what they want", escapes me. Go back to your hiding place.

Science needs to be "politicized" simply because that's how regulations are put forth.

Yep, we need science to put together regulations, except of course when that science disagrees with what you want regulated. No nukes! No GMO!

You're "freedom" fucking cop-out is outplayed. Why don't I have freedom to go and rob a store? Why can't I kill someone? Stop politicizing my morals! I should be able to do what I want!

Ah, throw in the Appeal to Extremes fallacy. Good job!

As previously said, ConservatIves elect people into office who share anti-science views. If you're choosing people who deny science to represent you, what else should I call you?

You shouldn't call me anything. You should debate my statements. Take a bit of your own advice:

Don't like the points someone is making? Cool. Explain why. Claiming BLM is a terrorist organization would be comparabe to me saying the Republican party is a terroristic organization,

As previously said, you have freedom to an extent. We don't live an a black and white world.

And that extent ends when it impinges on the freedom of someone else, of which a few social conservatives like to do, and a lot of liberals like to do.

I didn't change the subject of debate, I joined in.

LOL your obsession with climate change in post after post says otherwise.

Besides, I find the BLM debate childish and I only partook in it because there isn't much debate in other threads.

So you joined the BLM debate because it's childish, then proceed to hijack it and rant about what you wanted to. Cool.

My point is Global warming is an issue (which I guess wasn't directed to you, but from what I'm reading you still think that your freedom impedes on science)

No, liberals use science when it serves them to advance their agenda with the pathetic excuse that they are "concerned" and "caring" about humanity, and abandon it as soon as it fails to serve them. The end result is always the same, force people to do stuff rather than give them a choice.

If we had true freedom we would be able to murder, rape, steal without repercussion. You're cries of "muh freedom" are childish.

Sorry, no extra credit for the Appeal to Extremes fallacy a second time in the same post.

Nobody is forcing anything, thats why we elect people who share our views and standpoints. You don't think taxes should go towards so and so, and you hate being forced to do something? Elect someone who agrees with you.

You want other people to pay for shit you decide? Cool, let them pay voluntarily.

Freedom would let Pharmacies make drugs cost millions of times more, Freedom would let me walk into your house and rob you, Freedom would let me do whatever I want. So as I have said before, you have freedom to a certain fucking extent.

Sorry, no extra credit for the Appeal to Extremes fallacy a third time in the same post.

That was done to imitate the sarcasm you've been using every post. I'll act just as immature while still raising my points.

Cool, now that you've got that out of your system, back to BLM? Oh wait, no. The topic is too childish, therefore carry on with your, "liberals good. conservatives bad" and "climate change is killing us!" rants.

[Dab]

Yep, your brilliant logic of, "liberals are right about stuff, which is why we must always support what they want", escapes me. Go back to your hiding place.

For the sake of getting it through your thick skull this is the last time.

Liberals as people aren't always right as you have obviously pointed out, being a liberal position by definition would be to support GMOs.

Conservative policy was once liberal policy, any good liberal bill will become a conservative one in the future. If you honestly cannot understand what I am saying then you simply do not understand the words that I am using. Look up the definition of conservative and liberal since what I say doesn't seem to get through to you. What we are talking about is inherently liberal, if you really and truly did not know, democrats can be conservative too. There is a such thing as moderates as well, what truly and honestly baffles me the most is your lack of knowledge.

Edit: Due to your lack of coherent sarcasm you're just trolling. Please don't ever post in my thread again @PTMartin or you'll end up like Lunatic or worst...

[PTMartin]

What we are talking about is inherently liberal, if you really and truly did not know, democrats can be conservative too. There is a such thing as moderates as well, what truly and honestly baffles me the most is your lack of knowledge.

So sometimes liberals can be conservative and sometime conservatives can support liberal positions. And there are moderates too. How insightful! You are a fount of knowledge! Then there's the revelation that in 1865 liberals became democrats and republicans became conservative. Before that it was the reverse. The important thing to remember now is now is that Republicans are stupid and anti science. Have It got it right now? Thanks for clarifying!

[OncePhoenix]

I'm not going to go into detail, because I don't want to start arguments here.
Yes, African Americans are profiled by police. No, it's not entirely due to them being African American.
Is it wrong? Yes, but they do have a realistic reason for doing so.
However, the officers need to learn to be less trigger happy. Unless there is irrefutable evidence that the person is carrying a weapon, then they should not use lethal force. Tazers are quite painful, and even the toughest of men will be stunned for at-least a second or two. Additionally, if one must use a weapon. Shoot them in the Arm, or thigh. Very unlikely to die from that.

[John F. Kennedy]

I wonder if anyone here can actually tell me the true meaning behind BLM, No im not talking about your ignorant chant all live matter in hopes of slapping tape over the BLM Movement I mean the real reason behind the BLM movement.