• mcc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    To be honest, a lot of Republicans are still very respectable. The republican platform is fucked up, but if you are talking to your neighbor, don’t make his party affliation equal to his personal belief. A Democrat doesn’t believe in everything in the Democrat’s platform either.

    In that sense, insulting a party is not generally helpful for public discourse.

    • Poob@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t give a shit about personal beliefs, I care about outcomes. Republicans’ desired outcomes actively hurt people I care about, so I can absolutely tell them to fuck off. Even if they don’t “believe in everything,” they are indifferent enough to let horrible things happen.

    • NewEnglandRedshirt@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Then where is the Republican outrage against the fascist policies so many Republican politicians are advocating for? There are only two options: either they don’t care, or they’re secretly happy.

      "First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direct action;” who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.” ~~Martin Luther King, Jr

      • Fredselfish @lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly anyone today that votes Republican or calls themselves one (my boss) yet continues to vote republican just because either don’t care or wants what they want.

      • mcc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you are not in the republican circle, how do you even know how they perceive the policies?

        • NewEnglandRedshirt@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          … did you read the MLK quote I included? The fact that there aren’t many Republicans loudly and repeatedly condemning the leaders of the party says exactly that. If you want to read the whole thing, I recommend you take a look at King’s full Letter from a Birmingham Jail to fully understand the point: silence means acceptance.

    • glacier@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Democrats are not perfect, but if someone identifies as a Republican in 2023, there is something deeply wrong with their personal beliefs.

      • mcc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Dehumanizing your subject is easy. Republicans do that to people on the left too. Let’s just hate each other till we destroy each other. That’s gonna get a good society going.

    • Melllvar@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If they’re respectable, why are they still voluntarily supporting such a fucked up platform?

      You can’t have it both ways.

      • mcc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Best I can say, don’t make it so absolute. No one is perfect. Everyone has their share of sin. You are not an exception.

    • g0nz0li0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Your comment implies that people take insult when someone calls them out for supporting a platform that - just to take one example - decides it’s proper to prosecute victims of crime because they also think the government should have jurisdiction over woman’s body and a say in their health and wellbeing.

      Is them taking umbrage to valid crisis the real issue here?

      • mcc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        You support a platform for many different reasons. For example you really want small government, so what choice do you have? And how do you know that a republican definitely is a pro-lifer? And if he is a prolifer, how do you know he believes government should control woman? You can’t just paint them all as evil as you imagined. What you imagined is not your neighbor.

        • g0nz0li0@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          You can’t just paint them all as evil as you imagine

          Perfectly illustrates my point. I didn’t paint them as evil, I just criticised them. Big difference, which you seem unable to draw.

          There is absolutely nothing wrong with me saying “I get you have ideological views, but supporting a party that hurts people to win culture wars is not something I am not cool with”. Branding that as insulting or hateful is just attempting to dodging accountability by disingenuously claiming victim status.

          Party allegiance aside, it’s unreasonable and hypocritical for anyone to support a platform with an agenda that will directly and adversely impacts broad swathes of society with an expectation that they will not be directly or adversely impacted by their actions and decisions (which in this case is something as innocuous as simply drawing criticism).

          • mcc@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I didn’t paint them as evil, I just criticised them. Big difference, which you seem unable to draw.

            Rebranding Nazism as Republicans is not painting them as evil?

            I mean I understand as the discussion goes people often confuse themselves with what we are talking about, but the OP of the post is branding republicans as nazis, and nazis are people we don’t need to give any consideration to, these are people we should eliminate from the surface of the earth.

            There is absolutely nothing wrong with me saying “I get you have ideological views, but supporting a party that hurts people to win culture wars is not something I am not cool with”.

            Hey you want to get things done you have to start somewhere. If you think your republican friends are better off getting a new party started, I guess you can start the conversation there.

            But have a conversation, don’t just call them nazis.

            • g0nz0li0@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              The republican platform is fucked up, but if you are talking to your neighbor, don’t make his party affliation equal to his personal belief.

              …is the part of your argument I am responding to. Saying “don’t five people a hard time for supporting fucked up things” is pretty fucked up.

              • mcc@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                So something being messed up doesn’t mean you can’t support it. Let’s not even talk about the party, you might believe this country is fucked up. Every country have people who believe their own country has a lot of problems. It doesn’t mean you don’t support it. You support it because, say, you rely on it to achieve your own ideal, or perhaps you just love what it used to be and you want it to be more successful, or whatever.

                The platform isn’t a singular thing. I can totally see someone who’s in the party to support small government and having to endure the mess that is abortion and extreme gun rights.

                • g0nz0li0@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  you might believe this country is fucked up. Every country have people who believe their own country has a lot of problems. It doesn’t mean you don’t support it.

                  Agree! Supporting your country =/= being complicit in all the bad shit done by or in the name of your country. That’s why activism exists, that’s why people can and will protest.

                  So how come this same logic doesn’t apply if the protests and activism is being directed at your republican neighbour?

                  • mcc@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I mean if you talked with your neighbor and you can’t have a beer over some heated discussions and your neighbor is throwing dog shit in your yard and calling you names, yeh, direct your protest and activisim towards them because they are an asshole.

                    Being a republican doesn’t automatically make them an asshole. Talk first, treat a person as a person, instead of his political affiliation.

                    Your activism should never start with targeting people. Target ideas. Ideas won’t change but people are probably amenable if you use the right approach.

      • Stumblinbear@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        This belief depends entirely on the state. Other red states don’t give a shit. Kansas and Florida for example haven’t restricted it at all.

        • g0nz0li0@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not familiar with those states but after a quick search:

          Florida has an an abortion plan that permits prosecution of a women as a third degree felony in some circumstances.

          Kansas prohibits abortions after 22 weeks and “a woman who seeks an abortion will be given state-mandated propaganda designed to change her mind. She will then have to look at an ultrasound image, wait 24 hours and pay for the procedure out of her own pocket.”

          “Not as bad” isn’t really a W.

          • Stumblinbear@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Every country limits abortion to some extent. The UK limits it at 24 unless medically necessary. Denmark is at 12 weeks.

            The US was unique in that you weren’t permitted to limit it at all due to the supreme court decision.

            Some limitations are fine, imo.

            • g0nz0li0@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Wrong again:

              During the first trimester, when it was believed that the procedure was safer than childbirth, the Court ruled that a state government could place no restrictions on women’s ability to choose to abort pregnancies other than imposing minimal medical safeguards, such as requiring abortions to be performed by licensed physicians.[7] From the second trimester on, the Court ruled that evidence of increasing risks to the mother’s health gave states a compelling interest that allowed them to enact medical regulations on abortion procedures so long as they were reasonable and “narrowly tailored” to protecting mothers’ health.[7] From the beginning of the third trimester on—the point at which a fetus became viable under the medical technology available in the early 1970s—the Court ruled that a state’s interest in protecting prenatal life became so compelling that it could legally prohibit all abortions except where necessary to protect the mother’s life or health

      • ErevanDB@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        In the argument you call out, wasn’t the republican side pushing the decision of abortion legality to state level, putting it more in the hands of the people?

        Edit: should clarify, I’m unaffiliated, and just looking for answers.

        • ThatWeirdGuy1001@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah they pushed it for state level and when they realized most people even in Republican states didn’t support the ban they went straight to trying to push it federally.

          It’s all a grift for the sake of control and power. Acting like it’s anything less when the mask has been removed makes you complicit which is why I say fuck all republicans.

    • TheFriendlyDickhead@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ok I hate that you are beeing down voted. The downvote button is not the “I disagree” button, but more like a “this does not help the discussion” button. And your point was fair and your opinion. If you agree or not does not matter. That’s the point of a discussion for fucks sake.

      Pls don’t get to that reddit point of downvoting. The downvote behavior was so nice here the first few weeks, after I joined, but got so much worse after the last very big reddit migration wave.