United States Presidential Election, 2016

[Law abiding heretic]

They technically have the rights of american citizenship under the 14th amendment, whether it's a loop hole or not. There for under the ex post facto clause which is in the first section of the constitution would still be allowed to stay in the country, even if there parents were deported and the 14th amendment was repealed.

So are you saying ex post facto laws protection should be repealed as well?

In 1798 it was determined that the ex post facto prohibition applies only to criminal laws and is not a general restriction on retroactive legislation. If legislation passes that states that children of illegals do not get citizenship then that could be sent back.

Also thanks for the loaded question there, I really appreciated it

 

[TWD26]

It probably is a terrible idea. But to be honest I'm sick and tired of people in my country that I love so very much and everything it should stand for, being insulted by people abusing that freedom people have died for, to just kill each other over drugs and 'arbitrary' territory that they don't even own, and that after they die will be forgotten and have contributed nothing more then taking up space in the dirt somewhere.

To fight crime, fight poverty and the poor education in the cities that makes gang culture so appealing. Also fixing the societal racism structure in place would help.

 

[TWD26]

In 1798 it was determined that the ex post facto prohibition applies only to criminal laws and is not a general restriction on retroactive legislation. If legislation passes that states that children of illegals do not get citizenship then that could be sent back.

Also thanks for the loaded question there, I really appreciated it

Even if you're going to go off of that, you still can't pass bills of attainder that would strip civil rights from citizens.

 

[Brayden Kore]

You forget another thing that makes Gang Culture so easy to manipulate, "Do this or i'll put a cap in you and your family." The only societal racism structure I ever see is White Guilt. Again this is me saying that's all I've personally seen. Other than that? Honestly I've never seen racism of any note worthy scale in my entire life, aside from TV and movies.

 

[Warmonger]

Personally, I'd honestly just wage a war against violent gangs. They're more often then not no better then terrorists. Looking at you Chicago. And fear of death will fix a lot of things. I recall a country in the 40's that after losing 45,000 people in literally a couple of seconds never wanting to fight us again.

Are you suggesting we start firebombing American cities?

Joking aside, gang members have the same rights as average Americans. You don't just get to kill gang members.

We've tried wars against numerous things in this country. They don't really work out.

 

[Warmonger]

You forget another thing that makes Gang Culture so easy to manipulate, "Do this or i'll put a cap in you and your family." The only societal racism structure I ever see is White Guilt. Again this is me saying that's all I've personally seen. Other than that? Honestly I've never seen racism of any note worthy scale in my entire life, aside from TV and movies.

Structural racism isn't as overt and blatant as blunt racism, but just as insidious.

 

[Brayden Kore]

Well to take it to a serious level. I'd start by making violent gangs illegal, because they are comparable to domestic terrorism. They kill, threaten, rape, sell drugs, use illegal firearms, and generally harass the public in pretty much all ways. I'd add an extra bit of protect though, by saying that ONLY gangs who've been proven as violent (a certain number of rape/murders/crimes proven beyond a shadow of a doubt would be needed) are subject being criminalized to that extent. I was just saying a VERY vague sense of what the idea would be. The actual full idea would take a LOT of typing that I dont have the time for lol.

 

[Brayden Kore]

Structural racism isn't as overt and blatant as blunt racism, but just as insidious.

I personally don't understand racism. The thought that a meatbag is better than another meatbag, because the color of the bag is different doesn't compute to me. We're all meatbags, in my eyes. It'll baffle me until the day I die, that people think race matters. The idea that man needs an enemy greater than itself in order to survive is always something that comes to my mind in such a situation.

 

[+SpaceJesus+]

What I'm basically seeing throughout this thread is a plethora of different forms of anger towards the problems in society, and quite frankly I think that above all things is what is creating such a strange environment in this election. While I talk about Trump not being very bright concerning a complex situation such as this, the problem with arguing with him is that people sadly (pathetically if you will) don't have much of an answer. What are we doing about immigration? What are we doing about ISIS? People that try to rationalize it come to point where they are stuck with the unhappy fact that we have absolutely no endgame for any of these issues whatsoever.

America has been living day by day for decades now. No one has been bold enough or smart enough to to try to fix the real problems in a dramatic way. Obama has been one of the most passive leaders I have ever seen. I forgot he was even there at times. He just did so little in office, and what he did do has only divided this country further. The and the problem with all of this is that the people from both parties no longer want to represent the people they are getting votes from. There has been this air of superiority from both parties, the "we know what we're doing and the people are to stupid to know better than follow us" mentality. No one ever seemed to step down from their ivory tower and actually figure out what the common people think about things. This is what created Trumps success in his campaign.

Like him or not the man represents the sum of all of the governments failures in the past 20 years. The president refuses to acknowledge Muslim extremism in our country in order to keep fear of Muslims from developing. Truth is it was already there, and with people looking to their leaders and only seeing a strategy of "ignore it long enough and it will go away," it escalated the problems and led to the unjust persecution of innocent Muslims while the real problems of domestic terrorism went unnoticed because it is offensive to even bring up these issues. Donald Trump offers to act quickly and dramatically with new policy changes (though they are quite awful in concept). Result: Trump gains support. The government refuses to acknowledge the problems some people face because of illegal immigration, pretty much telling them they are making all of these problems up. People become angry, creating racial tensions that cause injustices, which leads to anyone speaking out against it to be labeled biased against Mexicans (because illegal immigration only ever happens because of Mexicans right?). Trump offers to react dramatically with bold policy changes. Result: trump gets support. In light of new amendments regarding marriage equality people become scared about the protection of their religious rights. The government decides to bulldoze right over any of these sentiments out of wanting complete acceptance of the new law. Not only is this unnecessary, as marriage equality can be integrated without such heavy handed and completely brutish means, it seeks to make some rights more inportant than others and completely ignores many more. This leads to tensions. Trump offers to protect religious values. Result: Trump gets support.

People need to realize that if we are to keep this country from going into a state of perpetual unrest and division amongst our people, we actually have to represent what the people want. Drop the whole politically correct ludicrousness. Talk to people. Be ready to accept the fact that some people have a different opinion and quite frankly that opinion is just as valuable as yours in most cases. This anger towards the current establishment is starting to burst at the seams. We can't keep ignoring it.

 

[BLADE]

Aside from the libel (and falsehood, as Trump represents a minority of the so-called "common people") against the lower orders in your post, could any of you Joseph de Mutterers (that's a very clever pun by the way courtesy of my ELITE EDUCATIONAL STATUS which unfortunately outs me as an enemy of the Trumpian Insurrection) point out what political correctness is?

Like an example of something that happened to you or someone you know, and how it was unreasonable?

I'm not a liberal (I actually think they're useless/class enemies) myself, and I have my issues with identity politics but it's not enough to say that something is utter tripe if your own schemata in riposte is ninety-five percent gobshite as well.

Eagerly awaiting your replies.

 

[Warmonger]

What I'm basically seeing throughout this thread is a plethora of different forms of anger towards the problems in society, and quite frankly I think that above all things is what is creating such a strange environment in this election. While I talk about Trump not being very bright concerning a complex situation such as this, the problem with arguing with him is that people sadly (pathetically if you will) don't have much of an answer. What are we doing about immigration? What are we doing about ISIS? People that try to rationalize it come to point where they are stuck with the unhappy fact that we have absolutely no endgame for any of these issues whatsoever.

America has been living day by day for decades now. No one has been bold enough or smart enough to to try to fix the real problems in a dramatic way. Obama has been one of the most passive leaders I have ever seen. I forgot he was even there at times. He just did so little in office, and what he did do has only divided this country further. The and the problem with all of this is that the people from both parties no longer want to represent the people they are getting votes from. There has been this air of superiority from both parties, the "we know what we're doing and the people are to stupid to know better than follow us" mentality. No one ever seemed to step down from their ivory tower and actually figure out what the common people think about things. This is what created Trumps success in his campaign.

Like him or not the man represents the sum of all of the governments failures in the past 20 years. The president refuses to acknowledge Muslim extremism in our country in order to keep fear of Muslims from developing. Truth is it was already there, and with people looking to their leaders and only seeing a strategy of "ignore it long enough and it will go away," it escalated the problems and led to the unjust persecution of innocent Muslims while the real problems of domestic terrorism went unnoticed because it is offensive to even bring up these issues. Donald Trump offers to act quickly and dramatically with new policy changes (though they are quite awful in concept). Result: Trump gains support. The government refuses to acknowledge the problems some people face because of illegal immigration, pretty much telling them they are making all of these problems up. People become angry, creating racial tensions that cause injustices, which leads to anyone speaking out against it to be labeled biased against Mexicans (because illegal immigration only ever happens because of Mexicans right?). Trump offers to react dramatically with bold policy changes. Result: trump gets support. In light of new amendments regarding marriage equality people become scared about the protection of their religious rights. The government decides to bulldoze right over any of these sentiments out of wanting complete acceptance of the new law. Not only is this unnecessary, as marriage equality can be integrated without such heavy handed and completely brutish means, it seeks to make some rights more inportant than others and completely ignores many more. This leads to tensions. Trump offers to protect religious values. Result: Trump gets support.

People need to realize that if we are to keep this country from going into a state of perpetual unrest and division amongst our people, we actually have to represent what the people want. Drop the whole politically correct ludicrousness. Talk to people. Be ready to accept the fact that some people have a different opinion and quite frankly that opinion is just as valuable as yours in most cases. This anger towards the current establishment is starting to burst at the seams. We can't keep ignoring it.

While I don't agree with all of your reasoning (in that I don't think the woes of this country are due to illegal immigrants, gays, or Muslims), I do agree that anger and frustration are the prevailing characteristics of the American electorate right now. Anger at the way things have been done for over thirty years and frustration at how completely weak, feckless, and out of touch most of the politicians in Washington are.

 

[Officiant]

Aside from the libel (and falsehood, as Trump represents a minority of the so-called "common people") against the lower orders in your post, could any of you Joseph de Mutterers (that's a very clever pun by the way courtesy of my ELITE EDUCATIONAL STATUS which unfortunately outs me as an enemy of the Trumpian Insurrection) point out what political correctness is?

Like an example of something that happened to you or someone you know, and how it was unreasonable?

I'm not a liberal (I actually think they're useless/class enemies) myself, and I have my issues with identity politics but it's not enough to say that something is utter tripe if your own schemata in riposte is ninety-five percent gobshite as well.

Eagerly awaiting your replies.

Joseph de Mutters is a bit of a stretch but a joke I can most definitely appreciate :cool:. I don't know how others would define "Political Correctness" but I would define it as a societal conspiracy of silence that denies us talking about important issues in society in any real terms because the answers to these topics already exist in a book somewhere with a list of approved responses and words to use. You don't like what someone says or they have a counter argument to yours, you get to call them any incarnation of a bigot or scream incessantly at them. Some I'm sure would also extend it to the current millennial culture that is prone to censorship and promoting a "right way of thinking". Now of course some of what people think of as "political correctness" is just changing social mores and norms that are very alien to some people. Just because it's not longer OK to use racial, ethnic, gendered or homophobic slurs doesn't mean you're some how being censored by a left wing conspiracy.

Fundamentally what political correctness does (I'll paraphrase Irshad Manji) is not allowing either segments of society or society at large to critique itself because certain views or opinions are shunned and are subsequently allowed to fester and their holders allowed to grow angrier and angrier that they are being denied a voice.

 

[BLADE]

We're not too far off each other. I think political correctness to the degree it exists is a weapon of the bourgeois left; a type of dialogical formaldehyde employed by the black/brown/Jewish (hi!) upper-middle classes in the interests of wresting particularized concessions from capitalism's superstructure. Morally it has little to do with the struggles of real radicals and socialists and communists and anarchists, etc. in the past (even the benighted New Left actually did something) for equality or with the wider humanistic notion of respect for all peoples and solidarity for different life experiences.

It's not really endemic but I will concede to the Right that it has the potent interests of certain apparatuses. The Democratic Party mostly offers that and reheated (and mendacious) American Social Democracy as its electoral tincture. Sometimes it erupts in relatively irritating forms. Consider the example of #OscarsSoWhite: basically a temper tantrum by rich mediocrities (like Spike Lee) about not enough rich black faces getting rich black roles. And the truth is there's a lot of color-prejudice in Hollywood, but it mostly hits (along with white people) on a class basis: gaffers and technical crew and costume sewists.

And of course ignores one dimension of Hollywood that nobody mentions which is that these movies don't really look like America, not just in terms of racial diversity but class diversity. Every romantic comedy is about some bovine-eyed upper middle-class archetype stuffed full of neuroses and self-absorption. Why aren't movies made about people or groups? Why is there no mention of class and labor solidarity? Why is violence, cruelty, mean-spiritedness and sociopathic juvenilia what sells?

The material is out there. As someone who grew up in a working-class area and who through the vagaries of biography now finds himself in a place with more Pinkberries than "Pink Houses" there is nothing inherently more interesting or cinematically viable about the latter (and indeed an argument much in the favor of the former.)

P.S. I would not use Irshad Manji as an example myself. The woman is a veritable ocean squall of hackery, conformism and a Vanity Fair-esque social climber. It's heartening, I suppose to see that even in these Orientalist times, a Muslim can play Versailles courtier for certain segments of the media establishment, but she's just awful.

Oh and she supports the sanguinary Israeli policies in Gaza and the West Bank. As my own people would say, she's kind of a putz.

P.P.S. I may also tip my hand a bit, but I'm not an idealist (in the philosophical sense) at all. The materialist basis for these ideas exist, mostly as a political prophylactic against elements the bourgeois "Left" is a self-styled palladium against.

 

[Warmonger]

I think there are two forms of political correctness. There's the literal form and there's the common form. The literal form are the ways in which politicians are taught by political consultants to speak. What does that mean. That means that, in its literal form, politically correct words and phrases are the ways in which politicians address the voters and, to the best of their ability, try not to offend them. So when you listen to lifelong politicians, whether they be Hillary Clinton or Martin O'Malley or Marco Rubio or Jeb! Bush, you can here a common way in which they talk. While the specific ideas and policy proposals may be different they always speak in the same measured tone. Speaking to despondently or too excitably is anathema to politics as usual. They use platitudes over and over again in every speech, town hall, debate, you name it. They play up the greatness of America and talk in broad phrases and terms.

In its literal form, political correctness does have a little leeway, though, depending on the crowd said politician is speaking to. For example, God, guns, deregulation, lower taxes, and Reagan are the standard talking points for Republican politicians. Every Republican politician will inevitably bring them up and speak about them in an almost worshipful way. The politically correct way to talk to conservatives and Republicans involves not crossing those political rails. Appeals to God are always made, guns are always good, deregulation and lower taxes are the only ways to achieve economic growth and bring jobs back from overseas, and Reagan is basically their second lord and savior (or fourth if you are Catholic ;)).

For Democrats, I think, it's a bit more shifty due to how the party has changed over the years. However, with confidence, I can say that some of the political rails for Democrats are efficient government, expanding and/or keeping social security and Medicare as is, accepting and not offending any and all demographics, and tax cuts for the middle class (and possibly even the wealthy). You cross those lines and yer done. Unless you have the persona and charisma of a person like Bernie Sanders.

"Common" political correctness, as I call it, is more centered around the common person rather than the politician. It also takes different forms and attracts some legitimate criticism and some illegitimate criticism. Some legitimate criticisms include the disturbing level of censorship on some college campuses, the way we as a society should deal with rape and sexual assault, issues involving immigration and globalization, etc. Some illegitimate criticisms, in my eyes, are some white people complaining about being looked down on for saying ******, slut shaming, body shaming, bigotry and discriminatory attitudes towards anyone not of your group, etc.

Of course, context matters. Not all political correctness is bad. I find it admirable that politicians and society as whole reject or at least look down on the use of racial and ethnic slurs.

If I'm allowed some personal exposition, I think one issue in regards to terrorism that is almost never talked about, and i think this is totally due to political correctness, is non-Islamic religious and conservative terrorism. Right now, in this country, you are far more likely to be killed by a terrorist who is white and not a Muslim (almost always a Christian). If you look at how our government prioritizes our counter-terrorism resources, far more effort goes to stopping terrorist acts that were to be committed by radical Muslims than goes to stopping terrorist acts that were to be committed by white Christian terrorists. People like the guy who shot up that abortion clinic back in November(?), the killer of George Tiller, the guy who shot up the Mother Emanuel Church in Charleston back in June, the well-known Sandy Hook shooting, the guy who shot up that Sikh Temple in Kansas(?), etc. And that's not even mentioning sovereign citizens who tend to be white and disavow the authority of the law. Some of them assassinate cops for god's sake. And yet, no one ever talks about these things as Christian terrorism. No. They're all just crazy people. Not terrorists. Just crazy murderers.

A'course, I'm just a dirty lib so take my opinion as you will. :p

 

[+SpaceJesus+]

While I don't agree with all of your reasoning (in that I don't think the woes of this country are due to illegal immigrants, gays, or Muslims), I do agree that anger and frustration are the prevailing characteristics of the American electorate right now. Anger at the way things have been done for over thirty years and frustration at how completely weak, feckless, and out of touch most of the politicians in Washington are.

They were just examples. The problems of America are far more complicated than such sibjects as sexual preference of all things. I have absolutely no problems with gays or Muslims. I have my beliefs, and I will not back away from them, but no one deserves to be treated as a lesser human because of their beliefs. In fact, taking that right of choice away is actually against my beliefs. You were given it for a reason. My grudge against these problems is actually that the unwillingness of the government to acknowledge these issues for what they are has made them worse for everyone, including those they are trying to defend. They are making people angry and scared, and that is dangerous.

 

[Officiant]

The only true problem I have with that is the labeling of some of these people as "terrorists". The calling of these lone-wolf white male shooters "terrorists" is certain en vogue at the moment (though I do not seek to invalidate your argument by calling it fashionable) but I think it's misled to some degree. The Sandy Hook shooter had no manifesto, no political leanings, he was just simply mentally disturbed. "Terrorists" seek to use violence as a weapon or device in a political struggle, and really the only two shooters on that particular list that would fall into the traditional terrorist category are the Charleston Church shooter and the Sikh Temple Shooter. Both had clearly stated goals, one was to encourage the start of a race war, the other was to stop the islamization of America and was tragically ill-informed.

I would however agree that the language we use with "shooters" versus "terrorists" is certainly interesting. "Terrorists" are either foreigners or have a foreign quality about them. "Shooters" are typically lone-wolf domestic terrorists and almost always white (European). Of course these two categories are also defined by methods. Not too many terrorists have favored the mass shooting model on American soil, instead preferring to use bombs or other explosive devices. Shooters though, use guns and the San Bernadino shooting is an interesting case since we do refer to the suspect as the "San Bernadino Shooter" same as any other mass shooter.

 

[BLADE]

I think you guys are needlessly mystifying the terrorism taxonomization problem. If you actually look at the historicity of what we would consider right-wing extremists (like the Klan) the record makes it clear: these entities thrived when they served the interests of the state and big business and all other sundries of the ruling class. It's why certain types of protests (those by immigrants or black people or workers --or worse yet strikes by the latter) are marginalized in the media, or ignored, or distorted or violently crushed.

tl;dr Muslims are easy to scapegoat. There's no real political price to be paid for doing so. Disaffected right-wingers are a reserve army in case fascism ever comes to the US (to say nothing of the fact that many in any case travel through the military-intelligence apparatus and thus endear themselves in this and a thousand other ways to the people at the top.)

I'll agree with you, Warmonger, on the instrumentalization of political correctness, particularly as it flows from a certain demographic base. I went to a certain small university in Connecticut (ugh, example right there) and most of the people in my graduating class are now investment bankers, or in politics, etc. And their language is just as cramped as their life choices.

P.S. I don't really have an opinion on the proliferation of Terror Talk. Ultimately I don't think there's anything to stop it and other late-capitalist pathologies from targeting people on my end of the political spectrum, but there's probably an abstract case to be made for some more forbearance in its use.

 

[Mr.BossMan]

Aside from the libel (and falsehood, as Trump represents a minority of the so-called "common people") against the lower orders in your post, could any of you Joseph de Mutterers (that's a very clever pun by the way courtesy of my ELITE EDUCATIONAL STATUS which unfortunately outs me as an enemy of the Trumpian Insurrection) point out what political correctness is?

Like an example of something that happened to you or someone you know, and how it was unreasonable?

I'm not a liberal (I actually think they're useless/class enemies) myself, and I have my issues with identity politics but it's not enough to say that something is utter tripe if your own schemata in riposte is ninety-five percent gobshite as well.

Eagerly awaiting your replies.

Political correctness.

I can't call a black person "Black" without raising an eyebrow. Instead you have to say "African American." Otherwise you're a borderline racist.

God forbid you talk shit on the Bible ans don't you dare say no man needs twenty guns, CAUSE WE LOVE OUR GUNS!

If you call a Hispanic, Mexican, and they ain't Mexican, then you basically made an enemy.

No one wants to be Rich these days, cause when you see a 16 year old with a brand spankin new Mustang on their birthday and you tell them "I wish I was rich." They get their panties in a bunch and get all defensive. Apparently their not rich.

You can't say fagot anymore. Cause that ain't right.

I mean hell its like if you don't believe what everyone else believes, then people target you. So I'm the bad guy now, but:

I don't hate Gay's, but I still want to say fagot. I love women, but damn they can be crazy as hell some times. I ain't a raciest but I'll call a black man black, just like he'll call me white. I don't give a damn if you're rich, I just wish I was rich, so I'll call you a rich kid if you're a rich kid. If you're Hispanic and I call you a Mexican, but you ain't a Mexican, then please know that I did not know and I meant no offense, I just said Mexican. If your a Christian, cool, my whole damn family is Christian, but know that I ain't and I'll cuss your good book up and down any day I feel like it. You like your guns? Cool so do I, but I don't need anymore than my deer rifle, my Beretta and my ten gauge. Your a Muslim? Good for you, I don't see no problem with it as long as you don't go flying into some buildings.

If you are a terrorist, you deserve to get the shit beat out of you. If you are a parent and you know you are not ready to be a parent, abortion is always an option. If you don't work, you shouldn't get paid. If you work at McDonald's, you ain't gettin no $15 an hour. College ain't free, no matter who the hell tells you it will be, so if you want to go to college, work for it. Health care should not be equal. The rich should not be taxed out the ass to provide for the poor. They worked for their millions so why the hell do you have the right to take their money away? You hate the police cause there out to get you? Call a crack head next time you need help. If you're a murder, rapist, kidnapper, child molester, you deserve to be shot dead on the spot. I'm tired of all these criminals on death row being sentenced then you have to wait 20 years to kill them.

I'm a simple man, I have simple beliefs. I will say what I want, judge who I want, think how I like and their ain't a god damn thing you can do about it. But I in turn will respect your views, you just need to respect mine.

If you don't, well, then fuck you.

Edit: also BLADE don't feel like I am speaking to you about any of this, I simply quoted your post, then got carried away.

 

[BLADE]

Hm.

 

[Marf]

Political correctness.

I can't call a black person "Black" without raising an eyebrow. Instead you have to say "African American." Otherwise you're a borderline racist.

God forbid you talk shit on the Bible ans don't you dare say no man needs twenty guns, CAUSE WE LOVE OUR GUNS!

If you call a Hispanic, Mexican, and they ain't Mexican, then you basically made an enemy.

No one wants to be Rich these days, cause when you see a 16 year old with a brand spankin new Mustang on their birthday and you tell them "I wish I was rich." They get their panties in a bunch and get all defensive. Apparently their not rich.

You can't say fagot anymore. Cause that ain't right.

I mean hell its like if you don't believe what everyone else believes, then people target you. So I'm the bad guy now, but:

I don't hate Gay's, but I still want to say fagot. I love women, but damn they can be crazy as hell some times. I ain't a raciest but I'll call a black man black, just like he'll call me white. I don't give a damn if you're rich, I just wish I was rich, so I'll call you a rich kid if you're a rich kid. If you're Hispanic and I call you a Mexican, but you ain't a Mexican, then please know that I did not know and I meant no offense, I just said Mexican. If your a Christian, cool, my whole damn family is Christian, but know that I ain't and I'll cuss your good book up and down any day I feel like it. You like your guns? Cool so do I, but I don't need anymore than my deer rifle, my Beretta and my ten gauge. Your a Muslim? Good for you, I don't see no problem with it as long as you don't go flying into some buildings.

If you are a terrorist, you deserve to get the shit beat out of you. If you are a parent and you know you are not ready to be a parent, abortion is always an option. If you don't work, you shouldn't get paid. If you work at McDonald's, you ain't gettin no $15 an hour. College ain't free, no matter who the hell tells you it will be, so if you want to go to college, work for it. Health care should not be equal. The rich should not be taxed out the ass to provide for the poor. They worked for their millions so why the hell do you have the right to take their money away? You hate the police cause there out to get you? Call a crack head next time you need help. If you're a murder, rapist, kidnapper, child molester, you deserve to be shot dead on the spot. I'm tired of all these criminals on death row being sentenced then you have to wait 20 years to kill them.

I'm a simple man, I have simple beliefs. I will say what I want, judge who I want, think how I like and their ain't a god damn thing you can do about it. But I in turn will respect your views, you just need to respect mine.

If you don't, well, then **** you.

Edit: also BLADE don't feel like I am speaking to you about any of this, I simply quoted your post, then got carried away.