4 ms·

I think she recklessly pushed it to get rid of Ted with disregard for how much it hurt her husband. It was the right outcome but done by an evil bitch for self

I think she recklessly pushed it to get rid of Ted with disregard for how much it hurt her husband. It was the right outcome but done by an evil bitch for selfish purposes that hurt her husband with no genuine regard for innocents. It wasn't some act of valor done to help people.

jhgvh 2y ago
[flagged]
themacguffinman 2y ago
Ted was a domestic terrorist mailing bombs across the country, how is it selfish to put that above "how much it hurt her husband"? What is a non-reckless way of pushing your husband to report an insane terrorist actively plotting to bomb more people?
- KobeQueef 2y ago
  The previous commenter’s claim was that she wasn’t putting that above it hurting her husband, rather that she simply acted out of her personal dislike for him. Also, why do you state “domestic terrorist” as if that automatically has a negative connotation? Further, why do you claim he was insane? Lastly, what evidence do you have that he planned to continue his bombing campaign when he informed the NYT that he would stop if they published his manifesto?
- Amezarak 2y ago
  I’ve never heard this story before, but she could have reported him herself rather than persuading her husband to, as the GP claims she did. I do think it’s a little distasteful to press someone else into a moral decision you made but won’t carry out. That’d be especially true if anyone was hurt between the time she realized who it was and the time she got his brother to report him.
Larrikin 2y ago
Your tone regarding a woman getting her husband to help turn in a terrorist definitely elicits a fuck her husband's feelings. If even one more person was murdered after the fact, the brother should have been charged as well. Seems like the only person doing the right thing was the wife.
- beaeglebeachedd 2y ago
  I would rather live in a society with the odd domestic terrorist whacko than one where the government dystopically forces family members to turn one another in or else go to jail too. I'm not against handling it but I could live with it a lot better if I handled the justice myself and dealt with the consequences of that afterward. I don't think I could ever offer a sibling, or spouse, to the kings men and feel right about it even if the 'ends' turn out right.
  - FrontierProject 2y ago
    I would rather live in a society where a "selfish person" still has an obligation to do the right thing and turns in an insane homicidal maniac rather than one where John Doe decides he has no obligation to save people's lives because Bob the psychopath happens to be his brother.

jhgvh 2y ago

[flagged]

themacguffinman 2y ago

Ted was a domestic terrorist mailing bombs across the country, how is it selfish to put that above "how much it hurt her husband"? What is a non-reckless way of pushing your husband to report an insane terrorist actively plotting to bomb more people?

KobeQueef 2y ago
The previous commenter’s claim was that she wasn’t putting that above it hurting her husband, rather that she simply acted out of her personal dislike for him. Also, why do you state “domestic terrorist” as if that automatically has a negative connotation? Further, why do you claim he was insane? Lastly, what evidence do you have that he planned to continue his bombing campaign when he informed the NYT that he would stop if they published his manifesto?
Amezarak 2y ago
I’ve never heard this story before, but she could have reported him herself rather than persuading her husband to, as the GP claims she did. I do think it’s a little distasteful to press someone else into a moral decision you made but won’t carry out. That’d be especially true if anyone was hurt between the time she realized who it was and the time she got his brother to report him.

Larrikin 2y ago

Your tone regarding a woman getting her husband to help turn in a terrorist definitely elicits a fuck her husband's feelings. If even one more person was murdered after the fact, the brother should have been charged as well. Seems like the only person doing the right thing was the wife.

beaeglebeachedd 2y ago
I would rather live in a society with the odd domestic terrorist whacko than one where the government dystopically forces family members to turn one another in or else go to jail too. I'm not against handling it but I could live with it a lot better if I handled the justice myself and dealt with the consequences of that afterward. I don't think I could ever offer a sibling, or spouse, to the kings men and feel right about it even if the 'ends' turn out right.
- FrontierProject 2y ago
  I would rather live in a society where a "selfish person" still has an obligation to do the right thing and turns in an insane homicidal maniac rather than one where John Doe decides he has no obligation to save people's lives because Bob the psychopath happens to be his brother.