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

  • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    31
    ·
    10 months ago

    Yeah… I agree. None of that makes selective enforcement the core of conservative laws.

    • Wakmrow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I agree those are bad examples.

      Better examples:

      Phillando Castile. All for gun rights until a black man is shot while legally owning a gun. One could run down the list of black people (and children) who have been murdered by the police because they “thought there was a gun”. Guns are legal and they’re quite vocal about supporting the right to bear arms (but only if you look white).

      Jan 6. All for upholding law and order and obeying the police until they don’t get what they want. They lied about the cities in this country being destroyed during the Floyd uprisings as if America was gone.

      All of the anti-trans laws passed are to “protect children” and yet they have not gone after any of the abuse scandals in churches or law enforcement.

      Build the wall. Enforced only against black and brown people at the southern border.

      How about holding the supreme court seat for a year?

      We could continue but I’ll just boil it down with a pithy quote: there are those who the law must protect but does not bind and there are those that the law must bind but not protect. That is the conservative idea. Go read the only moral abortion is my abortion with that statement in mind and it’ll make sense.

      • aidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        Phillando Castile.

        I haven’t heard that case, can you show some examples of “conservative” outrage?

        And I feel like it’s probably not race related seeing as conservatives were some of the first people to criticize the police in the Brenna Taylor case(a post about her boyfriends trial is still the top post on r/progun). Some conservatives also defended Andrew Coffee IV.

        Jan 6. All for upholding law and order and obeying the police until they don’t get what they want.

        From their perspective(by the way me explaining someone’s perspective doesn’t mean I agree with it at all like most of the people on this site seem to think!!!) their is a coup happening by the elites so they are going in to uphold the law and put in the rightfully elected(again in their mind) president.

        All of the anti-trans laws passed are to “protect children” and yet they have not gone after any of the abuse scandals in churches or law enforcement.

        Can you site any they defended recently?

        Build the wall. Enforced only against black and brown people at the southern border.

        I don’t see how that’s hypocritical.

        How about holding the supreme court seat for a year?

        IIRC not illegal- but against tradition

    • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I’d argue it does, conservative lawmaking has consistently operated with a distinct understanding (and execution) that shows “this applies to them not us.” I’d love for conservative law makers to do what they say and say what they mean. However, they won’t and thus can’t build a coalition that gets them elected by being honest about their policy goals.

      Conservative law making in the US has become at its core “outrage politics” (and that depends on selectively enforcing ideals, policies, and laws/antagonizing part of the population). I don’t make generalizations lightly, but this is the core and fundamental piece holding the Republican party together, and it’s an awful state of affairs.

      This can be further demonstrated by Vivek Ramaswamy climbing in the polls despite, as Chris Christie put it, “sounding like ChatGPT.”

      • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’m done with this conversation, you lot are ignorant, loud, and preventing actual progress and critical discourse.

        You want to talk about outrage politics? You morons are outrage politics. Fuck off.

        • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          K. When you figure out what discourse you want to have come back without an empty argument.

          You’ve just proven everyone else’s point that wrote you off. You’ve made no supportive arguments for your position and resorted to an opaque moral high ground where everyone else is an idiot.