The Second Term of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States of America
- Thread starter sear
- Start date
Shiftless2
Well-known member
Shiftless2
Well-known member
A naked, gold-covered Trump statue has been unveiled inside the European Parliament in Strasbourg. It's called "Orange Plague," also known as "King of Injustice," and shows him sitting on another man's shoulders holding an enormous golf club. Covered in reportedly 23-karat gold, of course. Even as a statue, he needs someone else to carry him.
The risk of using the "
Like" reaction function is of being misinterpreted.In the case of #4,083 a vehement reaction,
may be perceived as agreement with the Strasbourg display, -OR-the reaction of a Trump loyalist.
The statue depicted in #4,083 is unprecedented. In the Western world, is there such a statue of Kim Jong Un? In Parliament?
U.S. President Donald Trump has made the U.S. the laughing stock of the globe he has victimized. BUT !
He's just one guy.
The U.S. electorate is responsible for this.
So America, here's one for YOU:
BUT !
Thank you E. P. / Strasbourg for not suffering in silence. & !
Thank you S2 for reminding US, Trump may be wreaking havoc, but not unnoticed.
Shiftless2
Well-known member
Meanwhile in Dallas
www.facebook.com
If this doesn't motivate you, nothing will #lgbt | Andrew Tarr | Facebook
If this doesn't motivate you, nothing will #lgbt
www.facebook.com
Shiftless2
Well-known member
I never understood how anyone who wants a republic could support the death penalty?
Since we as individuals can not execute, then I see no way we can give that authority to a government we create?
It's a Founding premise of the United States that we have an unalienable right to life.
Unalienable means not to be separated, given away, or taken away. BUT !!
My opinion, and apparently not exclusively my opinion, is that if a human murders, they forfeit their own right to life.
"Cruel"?
"Unusual"?
By whose standard? Does it make MORE sense for us to impose / inflict our wholesome standard on a murderer? OR
is it more compassionate to embrace, apply the criminal's own standards in such cases?
Hint: those that don't want the death penalty should not perpetrate capital crimes.
It's a Founding premise of the United States that we have an unalienable right to life.
Unalienable means not to be separated, given away, or taken away. BUT !!
My opinion, and apparently not exclusively my opinion, is that if a human murders, they forfeit their own right to life.
"Cruel"?
"Unusual"?
By whose standard? Does it make MORE sense for us to impose / inflict our wholesome standard on a murderer? OR
is it more compassionate to embrace, apply the criminal's own standards in such cases?
Hint: those that don't want the death penalty should not perpetrate capital crimes.
When an armed person is attempting to kill you, then obviously you have the right of self defense to kill them first.
But executions are not defensive, so than have no such justification unless they acted as a deterrent against future murders?
But according to experts, like Charles Dickens, executions do not act as a deterrent, but instead show that murder is acceptible.
For example, Dickens showed how pickpockets enjoyed it when they executed a pickpocket, since it gave other pickpockets better opportunities to pick pockets.
This is supposed to be a republic, which then means government is just our own creation.
And we can not legally endow government with any authorities we do not personally already have.
Which means that since we individually can not execute, there is no legal way for us to create a government that can execute.
Yes.
That.
Certainly that.
Unquestionably that.
Absolutely that. BUT !
Not only that.
The People have a right to expect a relatively murder-free environment, residential neighborhood, workplace, market, town square, etc
Capital execution does not prevent a criminal from perpetrating murder.
Capital execution prevents a criminal from perpetrating murder again.
Who needs to be told this?
Isn't it rather obvious? DON'T KILL PEOPLE !