5 ms·
You’re allowed to aid; but you refuse to believe a nation is allowed to say “not here”. If your aim is to help, then the elected government has said find a dif
by nobodyandproud 1y ago
You’re allowed to aid; but you refuse to believe a nation is allowed to say “not here”.
If your aim is to help, then the elected government has said find a different way so what’s your next move?
As a lifelong Democrat, I’m forced to conclude this appeal from a certain segment of hardline liberals isn’t in good faith.
You may not like it and it’s shitty, but Hamas’ attack last year changed things for me; and I’m guessing I’m not the only silent centrist who thinks this.
Every lie of omission by extremist liberals deepens my suspicions.
- UncleMeat 1y agoA nation can say "not here" to suffering people in need of medical aid, driven by a self described "proud Islamophobe". I personally think that is monstrous.
- nobodyandproud 1y agoSo you’re declaring a nation can’t help without putting itself at unnecessary risk. I’d say a no-compromise outlook is monstrous. That’s the position of a zealot and is rightly distrusted. I entertained this discussion, but the bad faith is clear and I won’t be wasting any further time.
- UncleMeat 1y agoI really deeply and truly do not understand how an injured child coming to the US on a temporary visa is an "unnecessary risk." When a self-describe "proud Islamophobe" proposes a policy like this, I believe her that it is motivated by hating muslims.