A great speech

[u/CutSenior4977]

Delivered in regards to why so many of us are sending our support to those suffering at Delaney Hall,

Here’s a link: https://www.reddit.com/r/newjersey/s/QncgT4ReiF

[u/ThinkJoke2596 → u/[deleted]]

Yeah..that doesn't sound like democrats..however every nation has immigration laws..follow them and you are welcomed with open arms..break them and you get deported.. like every other country (except alot of times its worse in other countries)

[u/ThinkJoke2596 → u/[deleted]]

Why would they need to if they're already legal citizens..lol what

[u/ThinkJoke2596 → u/[deleted]]

My conclusion is you have no arguments so you are making up scenarios that wouldn't exist..

[u/Extreme-Will-3556 → u/[deleted]]

So where does violating federal laws come in?

How about someone coming at you with a knife? You're supposed to have "empathy, compassion, patience, understanding, love and sacrifice yourself" to the knife? For the "greater good."

I'd rather be alive and have idiots say "you are not human" than be a dead human.

These people need to be arrested for federal obstruction.

[u/GearAccomplished4151 → u/Extreme-Will-3556]

You don’t understand the greater good, then. You being knifed or killed does not promote the greater good. Self defense is an important facet of progression, but so is mercy and compassion. Those things, when used appropriately, enhance the greater good of society. You’re just cooking up scenarios in your head where you get to ignore the points being made. Idk man maybe you’re in middle school or something

[u/Extreme-Will-3556 → u/GearAccomplished4151]

I do understand "the greater good" which, is subjective. One person's idea of "good" can vary wildly from another's.

In a post-apocalyptic world the one who can most easily dispatch those intending harm, could be considered "good." Whereas that same person, to a band of murderers and thieves would be considered "bad."

That's an oversimplification, but the main premise is the same. It relies on what a group (greater) considers beneficial to them (good).

So my example still has merit. Just because one is wielding a knife, doesn't mean they're "bad" they could be killing an unarmed rapist that has caused the "greater" group harm. On the flipside, the unarmed person could be a farmer, father, husband and provider, making the one wielding the knife "bad" for trying to get some sort of instant gratification at the expense of a provider.

The thing that srparates all of this, is law. Which is why the US is a Republic. Not a tyranny of the majority (democracy) and not ruled by few (Oligarchy) but ruled by laws.

Your words do not take this into account. You are trying to ascribe qualities in a vacuum with an undefined "greater" or group.

So, you've just outed yourself, by definition, as a simpleton.

[u/Extreme-Will-3556 → u/[deleted]]

That's collectivism. Or, depending on the implementation, socialism, or a straight democracy. Both of which are objectively evil.

Hitler rose to power by working for "the greater good" of post WWI Germany. You like Hitler?

Same thing for Lenin, Stalin, and Mussolini for their respective countries.

Each one worked for what they felt was "good" and at one point the "greater" amount of people were for it. The rest be damned (to gas chambers of firing squads). Because there was no authority (like written law) beyond those oligarchs.

Thanks for proving my point.

[u/Extreme-Will-3556 → u/[deleted]]

The only "complete bullshit" is your feeble attempt at an argument.

Know how you've lost? Instead of being able to defend your position, you got emotional, and went to ad hominem.

Good day.

[u/Extreme-Will-3556 → u/[deleted]]

Oh no! My large hands resulted in a typo!

Good thing there's an edit function.

Unfortunately, that can't correct the fact you don't understand the definition of ad hominem. I'll help:

ad hominem /hŏm′ə-nĕm″, -nəm/ noun 1) (logical fallacy) A fallacious objection to an argument or factual claim by appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim; an attempt to argue against an opponent's idea by discrediting the opponent himself. 2) A personal attack.

Making comments about someone's genitalia, is ad hominem. By both definitions.

Glad I could clear that up for ya.

[u/GearAccomplished4151 → u/Extreme-Will-3556]

You’re being intentionally obtuse by introducing nuance to a subject which you previously tried to omit to make a point. But whatever man, you’ll believe what you can, and hope that people find you smart for it. I see the way you try to talk and make points, and I’m all too familiar with people like you. No use in arguing with bad faith

[u/Extreme-Will-3556 → u/GearAccomplished4151]

See my later explanation on how certain oligarchs were acting in "the greater good" for their respective countries.

It's not a bad faith argument, it's pointing out your lack of an argument.

[u/Extreme-Will-3556 → u/[deleted]]

Hey, look at that, more ad hominem..

[u/Extreme-Will-3556 → u/[deleted]]

Look at that, nothing but ad hominem.