Abbott ‘has the blood of a child on his hands,’ a congresswoman said. ‘No good person would do this,’ said Mexico President López Obrador.

    • daq@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      He didn’t say anything factually wrong. Neither did you in the first sentence, but then you went for a personal attack for no reason.

      People claim Lemmy is better because downvotes mean nothing, but that also encourages this shitty behavior.

      • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Someone implying a person should die without trial for violating border laws in peacetime is what encourages this kind of behavior.

        No one is owed civility.

          • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The irony of this comment in response to me calling someone a monster for implying a child deserved to die in a trap because they were in violation of civil tort is not lost on me.

            • Thekingoflorda@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The proper way to deal with someone you dissagree with is, downvote, respond without a personal attack (doesn’t help your point in any way) and block if you really hate them.

              This has nothing to do with the content in the discussion. We want this place to be a forum for discussion where everyone is treated with respect, this doesn’t work if we let people who we agree with do whatever they want.

              • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Heard that. Imma bow out of this thread.

                I wish you a fruitful future of civil disagreement with people who think it appropriate that violators of civil tort be murdered without trial.

        • daq@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No one is owed civility.

          Why the fuck not?

          Not replying is always an option.

          • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s a very valid point, everyone could just not reply to monstrous statements.

            I wonder what would happen if people who either want to get a rush from transgression or genuinely hold hideous views were never chastised?

            • daq@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Imagine if the judge reading a list of charges on you followed up each one with “you dumb fuck”.

              What you’re saying makes no sense.

              All I said is keep personal insults to yourself. You know nothing about the people you communicate with on Lemmy. You have zero insight into their life, their experiences, their education or anything that would give you the right to insult them personally.

              Just state your opinion and stfu. Full stop. If you’re unable to keep personal insults to yourself, don’t comment. It’s very simple.

              • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Judges do that kind of thing all the time. They literally comment on the proceedings and people in the vernacular in addition to using their position of power to influence the outcome.

                I know enough about the people writing stuff on the internet to break the usual social rules of decorum: some of them say vile, reprehensible, hateful, inhuman drivel and that is enough to insult them.

                What are you really saying here? Are you truly suggesting that when someone implies “hey, this little kids tragic death is acceptable because they were in violation of a law” it’s wrong to tell them that they’re a monster?

      • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If you have some sort of mental processing issue which precludes your ability to understand what context is, you’re excused somewhat.

        This was someone’s kid, just like you. If nobody points out how horrible these sentiments are, where will we end up? “They were a criminal” isn’t relevant to what sounds like an excuse for justifying their death.

        I edited this to be less vitriolic, I originally asked you to choke on a book, but let’s try the civil route.

        • daq@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You just can’t make a comment without personal attack, can you?

          Please give me context in which judge hands out sentence for even the most vicious of crimes and follows it up with personal attacks.

          I understand online forum isn’t a court room, but there’s zero reason for insults in either case.