• rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Condoning violence against things while condemning violence against people is really not such a big contradiction, especially when said thing is used to hurt people.

    Edit: Then again, a guy wanting other people to get shot probably doesn’t argue in good faith anyway.

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      4 days ago

      that’s the entire conservative thought process. always protect things over people. kill a homeless person? you’re a hero. use counterfeit 20 dollar bill? get strangled to death. rape? be our president. trespassing? get shot to death.

      • Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        trespassing?

        This is why the last time I made a sign for a pro-choice event, I made it in the shape of a uterus with a warning sign inside it, saying, “NO TRESPASSING: Violators may be aborted.”

        They value property rights, so it seems only fitting to frame access to our bodies by using their own arguments.

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 days ago

      Condoning violence against things while condemning violence against people is really not such a big contradiction, especially when said thing is used to hurt people.

      That’s opposite to what happened. They condemned violence against property, and condoned violence against a person