Ryu289 - Untitled

America invaded half the globe for the sake of freedom

Shooting ICE agents doesn't violate their rights at all in many cases, particularly in recent cases. The main moral/strategic reason to not shoot ICE agents is that it would risk escalation. But if ICE is escalating anyway, then past a certain point, this reason goes out the window. It might well be good if more people shot back.

ICE agents often act in ways that make them look like random thugs anyway, and it is often okay or good to shoot random thugs in self-defense and in defense of others. On a personal emotional level, morals aside, I want ICE agents to be afraid they might get shot, and I want them sometimes to get shot. I think this is sometimes morally good as well, though I leave it an open question how often.

I'm saying this on Tumblr and not on Facebook, because I think I'm entitled to say it, and I am less afraid of getting in trouble on Tumblr than on Facebook.

Conservatives' takeover of Supreme Court stalled by John Roberts-Brett Kavanaugh bromance

WASHINGTON – The conservative takeover of the Supreme Court that was anticipated following President Donald Trump's two selections has been stalled by a budding bromance between the senior and junior justices.

Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s newest member, Brett Kavanaugh, have voted in tandem on nearly every case that’s come before them since Kavanaugh joined the court in October. They’ve been more likely to side with the court’s liberal justices than its other conservatives.

The two justices, both alumni of the same District of Columbia-based federal appeals court, have split publicly only once in 25 official decisions. Their partnership has extended, though less reliably, to orders the court has issued on abortion funding, immigration and the death penalty in the six months since Kavanaugh’s bitter Senate confirmation battle ended in a 50-48 vote.

It often feels like mainstream acceptance of queer people, particularly trans and nonbinary people, is contingent on there being few of us. When I was a kid witnessing arguments about gay marriage, statistics about LGBTQ people were so often presented in such a way as to reassure everyone else that we are not dangerous because we are rare. "It's not going to cause societal collapse ... because such a small percentage of people are gay."

And conservative rhetoric against queer people, particularly trans people, which explicitly refers to us as a "social contagion," really underscores that any perceived "increase" in sexual or gender diversity will be seen as a threat. If queer people are permitted to exist, we must be aberrant and isolated. If we are normal and natural and commonly occurring, it is because something has gone terribly wrong.

So. Forgive me if I bristle at the well-meaning argument that "these trans athlete bans are ridiculous, they're only going to affect a few dozen people!" I understand where they're coming from. But I think trans people should be free and abundant.

Performative feminism is a most annoying aspect of our times.

Please note that while what they said is based on a real quote, these participant characters are entirely fictional and not based on anyone real.