3 ms·
> The reason he had to give up his position was not his hypocrisy. If that’s the case then 99% of all politicians would have to give up their positions. No, yo
by Timon3 9d ago
> The reason he had to give up his position was not his hypocrisy. If that’s the case then 99% of all politicians would have to give up their positions.
No, you're lying. His colleagues publicly asked Spahn to resign explicitly because of the hypocrisy: https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/spahn-ruecktrittsforderungen-cdu-100.html https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/spahn-ruecktrittsforderunge...
Over the last few weeks, I've noticed you sharing many such misinformed framings of current news in Germany. May I ask why?
> Even if he was a supporter of surrogacy, he would still be forced to step back because surrogacy is illegal in Germany. Further, there was no debate or discussions on making surrogacy legal after that incident by the so called all other liberal progressives parties like Greens or the left that pretends to be all for women’s rights and equality
Just like the last few times you claimed "there was no debate" on a topic in Germany: yes there was, it just doesn't follow your caricaturesque understanding of leftist politics.
- sajithdilshan 9d ago[flagged]
- Timon3 9d ago> Sharing the government propaganda site’s link as a source has to be the joke of the year. Since the article is essentially a collection of quotes, each of which is easily verifiable by following links, you'll have to be a little more specific about the "joke". > I’ve shared no misinformation on Germany, besides the hard cold truth. Only suicidally empathetic leftists like yourself would find that to be misinformation. You literally keep claiming variations of "nobody talked about this/that topic!", but in each instance I can attest that you're completely wrong. My own views have nothing to do with the fact that public discussions did happen. I'm sure you'll bring up some arbitrary threshold to justify yourself, but your comments are misrepresentations, and your attack makes it seem very much deliberate. > There was no debate on surrogacy after he resigned[...] I don't know what to tell you, but there was - anyone can easily look up the online discussions, and the many news articles covering the public debate. > it was as if surrogacy was used as a tool and then discarded when it doesn’t benefits the lefties See, this is where your bias becomes undeniable: 1. The majority of complaints about Spahn's bigotry did not come from leftists. Why aren't you mentioning how his own voters complained far more? 2. You're assuming that leftists should behave according to your cartoonish understanding of their views. Being "pro-women’s rights and equality" does not logically imply that one should advocate for surrogacy, unless you presuppose that your subjective views on surrogacy are objectively correct. But since you've already branded me as a "suicidally empathetic leftists", I won't waste more effort explaining this - it's trivial to find discussions and philosophical texts on all this.
- gizajob 8d agoHa have you heard yourself? “You’re lying! - it was his hypocrisy about his completely illegal behaviour not the completely illegal behaviour.”
- Timon3 8d agoYes, I do! Spahn is infamous for doing lots of illegal stuff, and none of it resulted in him stepping back, until the surrogacy story. His constituents and his party publicly criticized him for his bigotry and asked him to step back. Which part do you have trouble following? If you were mildly familiar with the situation, you'd know that.