@Benrealitytalks@giggitysusie@defcozmo@BrennCookk@GOP__Ls Because in a cult, breaking outside changes means disloyalty and disobedience to the congregation.
They've been conditioned to a set, molded mindset, and anything outside the realm of changing old mindsets is seen as blasphemous and "should be punished accordingly."
@CoffinsInBloom A default assumption is usually stem towards an insecure woman who has no control over her own life, so she takes it out on people who are not old or mentally developed enough to be heard.
Not an excuse obv, just pointing out the possible reason of her appalling behavior.
@KaijuDanimal@___TheGOOdWitch It just encourages these people to dig their boots into the sand harder.
like if someone pointed out a person’s relationship is abusive, the abused would double down and stay with the abuser to try to prove to everyone the relationship is not abusive. To a point of no return.
@giggitysusie@defcozmo@BrennCookk@GOP__Ls Because in the Bible once Jesus died on the cross, the barbaric teachings of the Old Testament was supposed to be a way for humans to LEARN how humanity was like and to grow FROM it.
But radical Christians are against the New Testament because it’s “woke”
Like love & forgiveness
@___TheGOOdWitch Because he knows that when MAGA cry and lose their temper, they get praised for it, but if he loses his temper by their obvious rage baiting, they would use it against him to go after other Democrats.
It’s a double standard that they blatantly set to dems in a debate.
This is absolutely unhinged.
A horrific case involving one woman’s severe mental health crisis somehow leads to: maybe women shouldn’t vote and maybe women shouldn’t be allowed to freely interact online.
That isn’t an argument. It’s collective punishment dressed up as political commentary.
Imagine applying this logic to men. Every time a man commits an act of violence, should we reconsider men’s voting rights? Restrict their internet access? Of course not because we understand that one individual’s actions do not justify stripping civil liberties from an entire sex.
You can debate the Lindsay Clancy case. You can disagree about culpability, psychosis, treatment, or the legal standard for insanity. But using a tragedy as an excuse to suggest women deserve fewer constitutional freedoms is not serious thinking.
The 19th Amendment isn’t conditional upon women behaving in ways you approve of. Neither is our basic freedom to participate in public life.