It sounded like maybe you were secretly happy about the murders, or sympathized a little bit. If not, that’s my mistake and I apologize.

I’m addressing the victim blaming apologists in this thread. If that isn’t you then carry on.

Free speech means being able to say and support things you believe in without the threat of being murdered for it. Any sympathy for the murderer undermines free speech and democratic society. This is not complicated…

Seems like a lot of victim blaming in here. It can be very simple. Don’t murder people you disagree with. Also, free speech needs to be protected culturally as well, and not just through the government. But the government must also protect free speech, and that includes protecting people from others. There doesn’t need to be a discussion about understanding motives at all. It’s wrong and needs to be condemned, full stop. Otherwise you don’t have a free country. You can’t hand wave it away or shrug just because you understand their motive.

It’s illogical to compare them from a moral perspective. You don’t get to just shoot people because they have a different perspective than you, because they were raised differently or get their news from different places than you do. It’s not exactly whataboutism though, it’s more of a false equivalence. Whatever the case, the gunman is not morally justified in murdering these two people. If you think he is, then you are blinded by ideology and shouldn’t be allowed to participate in democratic society.

You aren’t over reacting. It’s a massive false equivalence comparing what Israel has done against the murder of two individuals. The guy that got murdered isn’t Israel. He’s a person with opinions, right or wrong. He got murdered for a few tweets and an affiliation with Israel. He’s not a combatant, but a civilian. Same for his wife. People justifying these murders are flat out wrong, and there’s no place in America for ideological murders. In order to have a system where free speech is protected, you can’t allow people to be murdered for their views. There is no defending these murders or trying to justify them.

It’s mostly a metric people use to prove their superiority over other people, when all of the other metrics for happiness and success suggest otherwise.

There’s nobody to speak for the woman either way. This wouldn’t be a clear issue in any state.

It’s pretty hard to take you seriously tbh.

You got a lot of anger bud.

What are you even talking about.

It’s still way up from a year ago. The insane climb after the election was unsupported hype, which has been corrected. Say what you want about tesla, but the stock price looks pretty healthy.

That only applies if you are the objective truth. If you are wrong, then it’s just another tool for bigotry, an excuse to ignore other opinions.

Who gets to decide who is a fascist and therefore doesn’t deserve to participate in democracy? What is the criteria for not deserving a voice? How do you define fascist? Maybe I’m cynical, but if you can eliminate popular political opposition by branding them as something, that’s a lot of motivation to brand them.

Advertising, marketing, and the stock market are the worst aspects of capitalism, and the system could be improved dramatically with heavy restrictions on all of those. Yeah it would shrink the economy, but the new steady state would be much better. Less waste, better stuff.

There’s only one political party in German history who banned other political parties. Just because you call a different party a fascist, doesn’t mean you get a pass to act like a fascist.