Reddit users are reporting Christian websites for violating Virginia's new porn identification law, citing vulgar passages in the Bible
stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to 
insider.com
As more and more states pass laws targeting "pornographic material" in books and online, they are repeatedly running up against a problem: The Bible has not just a few passages that could be considered indecent
You are viewing a single comment
I don't need to put any words into your mouth, your reply to the comment was to ignore all the real, objectively true examples and just claim that despite the fact that they're the actions of real conservative policy makers, that they somehow have nothing to do with real conservative policy
You ignore the faults of real world conservatism, holding up this idealistic version of conservatism you have in your head as "real" conservatism. Ill bet you also hold that conservatism has nothing to do with anti-LGBT+, despite their policy makers constantly making anti-LGBT+ policy decisions
You're completely ignorant of who I am and you're reinforcing my initial point that we should be careful about creating an echochamber.
And you're reinforcing mine by continuing to not actually address any of the actual points.
Pointing out actual, provable examples of selective enforcement by conservatives isn't an "echo chamber" it's discussing real world politics
Ultimately it looks from my perspective like you're falling into the classic trap of just assuming that when a lot of people disagree with you, that they're just mindlessly repeating talking points - rather than ever considering that your own view might be skewed. Further reinforced by the fact that you steadfastly refuse to actually talk about the issue, and instead just keep deflecting and crying "ECHO CHAMBER".
And no, I have no idea who you are, why should I care though? This is a discussion about conservative politics, not you or your feelings.
You're trying to say "there are many examples of selective enforcement in conservative laws" and I'm saying "yeah, no shit, I agree with you"
Meanwhile I'm being attacked for saying it's important to be reasonable, demonstrating the echo chamber I'm talking about.
So if you agree that what's being said is factual, then what exactly is the concern here regarding "echo chambers"?
A echo chamber is dangerous when people are spreading misinformation, a group of people acknowledging a very real negative aspect of a major political party is in no way "echo chamber" type behavior.
Now if we were saying "all conservative voters and politicians are Nazis", id agree with you that caution should be given about echo chambers, but cautioning about echo chambers when objective facts are being discussed comes across much more as you trying to deflect away from facts you don't like being discussed.
Would it help you if we also talked some trash about democrats?
Biden is too old for office
Most elected democrats are hypocrites, at least to some extent
Virtually every politician, including the left leaning ones, in the US are corrupt to som extent, and usually to a severe degree
There? Are you satisfied that we're not an echo chamber?
Not denying that Biden is very old and that any vote for him carries a material probability that it also elects the VP for president, the vast majority of politicians are very old in the USA
The concern is that you said "conservatives", not "what's popular amongst conservative politicians", or "what's popular amongst conservative media", or even "most". You just said conservatives, that is villifying all people by nature of a describing themselves by a very broad term(or even someone else ascribing it to them). Their initial complaint was generalization and you attacked them with evidence of it being true for some conservatives.
Who elects conservative politicians?
Who consumes conservative media?
Every person who votes conservative is guilty of the behavior I describe because - As pointed out above - they vote in the politicians who do these things
You can't vote a politician into power and then not take responsibility for their actions
Then essentially every American who votes is guilty of drone bombing civilians because presidents from Republicans and Democrats did it.
Except that I that example, as you say - they have no actual choice in the matter because as you say it doesn't matter who they vote for. That being said, I think we all do bear some small share of the responsibility for the atrocities our country has committed, if only because we benefit from them - but that's a whole other debate.
My point is that every conservative has a very easy choice each election - support the conservative party, or oppose them. If they choose the former, that's their right, but theyre responsible for having made that decision, and don't get to pretend that all the terrible shit the GOP is doing, all the way up to it's ongoing attempts to subvert the election process and undermine the justice system, is somehow not their responsibility, despite voting for it.
And in the interest of fairness, the same goes for the Dems. I bare some sense of responsibility for Biden's union busting of the railworkers strike last year for having voted for him. That's how it works. But I think any rational person looking at the two parties from a utilitarian standpoint of ethics can see pretty easily that the evils of the GOP vastly outweighs that of the Democratic party
No you can vote for the non-evil, like I do. But I understand that it is a mature decision to vote who you see as the lesser evil with a chance.
No, not at all? If I am one of two plumbers in a town and someone randomly kills the other plumber I profit from that, but I have 0 responsibility for the murder.
There is some responsibility, but not exactly the same as if you were a perpetrator yourself.
Most people are not utilitarian, or at least I hope they aren't.
Idk if I'm having a stroke, or you are - but this sentence makes no sense to me - though I think I can guess at your point from context, and I broadly agree - at least up until the point that you claim that voting for the "lesser evil" exonerates you of any responsibility for the actions of the party you voted for.
Except in that example, you didn't help give power to the murderer, whereas for the actions of our government, we do.
Not exactly the same, no - I agree. I the same way that if you came across an ongoing hate crime on the street and cheered on the perpetrator you wouldn't bear the same responsibility as the actual perpetrator, but it still makes you evil in my opinion.
I disagree, I think most people's natural approach to ethics (when they bother with it at all) is to compare the net harm vs the net good of the action their trying to weigh. That's literally how we teach children the difference between right and wrong - we ask them to consider the consequences of their actions, and whether those consequences are good or bad).
Either way - I think it's clear you're not changing your mind on this, and I'm just repeating myself, so unless you have some novel point to raise I'm done arguing about it. Feel free to continue to distance your decisions with their consequences for others if you prefer (lord knows most people do, unless those consequences are bad for themselves)