• HerrBeter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Lmao pretend you can’t even fathom what he meant, that the system is rigged and that they got the result they wanted because the US is seemingly inherently corrupt.

    Nonetheless it’s no surprise, this woman would’ve needed help and care. There’s only speculation that could be done regarding circumstances, but I think it boils down to the “pro life” - laws being ironic

    • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I know exactly what they meant. What I don’t know is how it’s related to what I said.

      We can have a conversation about how our prison systems treat prisoners. Which we’ll likely agree on

      Or we can have a conversation about police abuse of power, which we’ll probably also agree on.

      Or we can have a conversation about our broken criminal justice system, which seems boring because again, we’d probably just agree.

      Or we can have a conversation about whether pregnant mothers, in general, should be allowed to be imprisoned for attempting to kill their unborn children, but it seems like people just want to derail the conversation with irrelevant arguments.

      But you go on with ya bad self, Mr. Straw Man.

      • HerrBeter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        No, your “red thread” was that it was just to take the baby away with cps(?) because she either did or does narcotics. And somehow you feel it is derailing to even take any question outside the narrow scope of it.

        It is what people are discussing, it is a health issue. Both addiction and abortion are.

        • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          I don’t know what a “red thread” is.

          was that it was just to take the baby away with cps(?) because she either did or does narcotics

          Yes that’s correct, good job.

          And somehow you feel it is derailing to even take any question outside the narrow scope of it.

          Except it’s not “outside the narrow scope”, it’s got nothing to do with my statement. And you know that you can’t argue with my statement so the only way you can “win” is to argue about something else entirely.

          It is what people are discussing

          It is not what I was discussing, nor was it what the person I replied to was discussing.

          • HerrBeter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Not interested in winning, is this projection? If so, change the mindset. Why are you so belittling? Read of the appeal to ridicule.

            And if you’re not interested, not answering only means one part simply cba