The Democrat Party Hates America

[FlashDangerpants]

Abrego Garcia

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-se29BwMZfE
Here's the guy you've been defending, covering himself with glory.

Bring that evidence before an appropriate tribunal in the correct manner in accord with due process then. All that I ever asked for was for him to get due process.

He isn't my hero, or my saint, he's just a guy who was denied a fair trial according to the rules which is something that no civilised nation allows. Why is this too difficult for you to understand?

[Immanuel Can]

Abrego Garcia

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-se29BwMZfE
Here's the guy you've been defending, covering himself with glory.

Bring that evidence before an appropriate tribunal in the correct manner in accord with due process then. All that I ever asked for was for him to get due process.

He isn't my hero, or my saint, he's just a guy who was denied a fair trial according to the rules which is something that no civilised nation allows. Why is this too difficult for you to understand?

Not a citizen. A terrorist, an invader, a drug lord, a wife-beater, but not a citizen. The process he is due is being identified and booted out. Nothing more.

[FlashDangerpants]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-se29BwMZfE
Here's the guy you've been defending, covering himself with glory.

Bring that evidence before an appropriate tribunal in the correct manner in accord with due process then. All that I ever asked for was for him to get due process.

He isn't my hero, or my saint, he's just a guy who was denied a fair trial according to the rules which is something that no civilised nation allows. Why is this too difficult for you to understand?

Not a citizen. A terrorist, an invader, a drug lord, a wife-beater, but not a citizen. The process he is due is being identified and booted out. Nothing more.

Due process under law applies to non-citizens too, you have no excuse for that ignorance.

For everything else: Bring that evidence before an appropriate tribunal in the correct manner in accord with due process.

[Immanuel Can]

Bring that evidence before an appropriate tribunal in the correct manner in accord with due process then. All that I ever asked for was for him to get due process.

He isn't my hero, or my saint, he's just a guy who was denied a fair trial according to the rules which is something that no civilised nation allows. Why is this too difficult for you to understand?

Not a citizen. A terrorist, an invader, a drug lord, a wife-beater, but not a citizen. The process he is due is being identified and booted out. Nothing more.

Due process under law applies to non-citizens too.

Different processes for different situations.

[FlashDangerpants]

Not a citizen. A terrorist, an invader, a drug lord, a wife-beater, but not a citizen. The process he is due is being identified and booted out. Nothing more.

Due process under law applies to non-citizens too.

Different processes for different situations.

Bring that evidence before an appropriate tribunal in the correct manner in accord with due process then. All that I ever asked for was for him to get due process.

He isn't my hero, or my saint, he's just a guy who was denied a fair trial according to the rules which is something that no civilised nation allows. Why is this too difficult for you to understand?

[henry quirk]

Basically, all you're doing, in terms of your own argument, is lobotomizing yourself -- reducing your own argument to a mere collocation of chemicals produced by prior chemicals and physics, and unrelated entirely to truth and reason. And if that's all your "argument" really is, just a byproduct of Deterministic forces, its existence can be no more concerning than the disposition of one pebble to another.

Yep. Been thru all that with him multiple times in the other thread. He wants it both ways. He can't have it both ways. There's no middle ground where he can lay claim to the benefits of metaphysical freedom while retaining determinism. It's one or the other: metaphysical freedom or determinism; free wills or meat machines. There's no third option. His compatibilism is ridiculous. He's stupid, deluded, or -- as I say in the other thread -- a liar.

Again: if this...

Here’s the brutal truth: your brain is a deterministic machine, operating under the same unyielding physical laws as a rock rolling downhill. You don’t control your thoughts, your desires, or your decisions. You are driven by a cascade of external inputs, biological processes, and environmental stimuli—all of which you neither initiated nor directed.

...is true, then all his fine ideas about justice, morality, social reform, education, compassion, meaning, value, what's good, what's evil, etc. are empty and no amount of redefinition and assertion changes that.

[Immanuel Can]

Due process under law applies to non-citizens too.

Different processes for different situations.

All that I ever asked for was for him to get due process.

He's due only the process we use for invaders.

[FlashDangerpants]

Different processes for different situations.

All that I ever asked for was for him to get due process.

He's due only the process we use for invaders.

That's not the law. Civilised nations follow the law.

[Immanuel Can]

All that I ever asked for was for him to get due process.

He's due only the process we use for invaders.

That's not the law. Civilised nations follow the law.

The law is for citizens. Deportation is for invaders.

[BigMike]

If this...

Here’s the brutal truth: your brain is a deterministic machine, operating under the same unyielding physical laws as a rock rolling downhill. You don’t control your thoughts, your desires, or your decisions. You are driven by a cascade of external inputs, biological processes, and environmental stimuli—all of which you neither initiated nor directed.

...is true: you are nada.

Oh Henry, there it is again—your favorite quote from me. I’m flattered, really. You’ve repeated it so many times across so many threads, I’m starting to think you might want it printed on a T-shirt. Or maybe a pillow. You know, something cozy to scream into at night.

But here’s what puzzles me: What exactly is it that upsets you so deeply about it? Let’s walk through it together, sentence by sentence, since you keep circling back to it like it’s haunted you since the day you read it.

"Your brain is a deterministic machine, operating under the same unyielding physical laws as a rock rolling downhill."
Now Henry, is it this part? Is it the comparison to a rock? Too earthy? Too honest? Do you believe your brain is exempt from the laws of physics? That your neurons operate by some fifth force not yet discovered by science—perhaps willium majesticum? I hate to break it to you, but it’s gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. That’s it. Those are the only forces at play. Your thoughts don't levitate above them by sheer force of personality.

"You don’t control your thoughts, your desires, or your decisions."
Oof—maybe this is the kicker. Does it bruise the ego a little too much? The idea that your sense of authorship is just the latest illusion in the long parade of human self-flattery? Don't shoot the messenger, Henry—I didn’t invent cause and effect. I just acknowledge it.

"You are driven by a cascade of external inputs, biological processes, and environmental stimuli—all of which you neither initiated nor directed."
Now this is just basic neuroscience and physics. Honestly, it's a miracle it sounds so poetic given how straightforward the science is. Are you arguing that you did initiate your genome, your upbringing, your cultural surroundings, and every photon that ever struck your retina?

So help me out, Henry. Which sentence makes you declare “you are nada” like you’re in a spaghetti western having an existential crisis? Because from where I’m sitting, all I did was lay out the physical facts. You’re the one having the philosophical meltdown over it.

[FlashDangerpants]

He's due only the process we use for invaders.

That's not the law. Civilised nations follow the law.

The law is for citizens. Deportation is for invaders.

That's not the law. Civilised nations follow the law.

[Age]

He's due only the process we use for invaders.

That's not the law. Civilised nations follow the law.

The law is for citizens. Deportation is for invaders.

it could then be said and argued that absolutely any one after "christopher colombus's' arrival on 'that land' who was not already on 'that land' could then just be 'deported', as 'the law' is, supposedly, only for 'citizens of that land, and, well according to your own 'logic' and claim anyway, there is no law nor due process for those who are not 'citizens of that land', correct?

you can not 'now' start claiming, but 'the, 'current', law' is for 'the, 'current', 'citizens', as 'the, current', laws' were, obviously, made up by 'you, the invaders'.

Either 'a country' is civilized, where 'the laws' of 'that land' are for every human being on earth, equally. Or, they are not.

And, in a Truly civilized place all human beings are treated with 'due process' to distinguish if one is 'currently legally' allowed' to stay, or not.

Deporting any one, without having gone through the 'legal system', legally nor fully, or in other words without 'due process', is a sign that 'that country' has gone 'backwards', and thus is not 'civilized', at all.

(And, by the way, 'this' only applies in the days when this is being written, when you adult human beings are no way near reaching full and True civility. That is; when 'laws' are not even needed. you posters, here, in this forum, are, still, quite a while of from learning, and understanding, and living 'this way', yet. As can been clearly seen you can not even get 'your own' "leaders" to follow and abide by 'your own made up laws'.)

[mickthinks]

That's not the law. Civilised nations follow the law.

The law is for citizens. Deportation is for invaders.

Cruelty is never civilised. Never has been, and never will be. But it is popular with right wingers like Immanuel Can.

Officials beat and shocked Hernández Rojas with a Taser while they were deporting him to Mexico through the San Diego border in May 2010. He was hospitalized and died a couple of days later.
[…]
“It’s the result of use-of-force laws that violate international standards and fail to protect civilian life. It’s the result of a justice system that has proven itself incapable of holding law enforcement agents accountable.” https://truthout.org/articles/intl-huma ... ed-killed/

[Ben JS]

Cruelty is never civilised. Never has been, and never will be.

Wish cruelty weren't a thing -
Anything can be resolved without it.

If one capacity could be removed from life,
without it affecting any other capacity -
the capacity for cruelty seems best to be without.

The world would be a better place, imo.

[Walker]

Yeah, that’s a bit of an overstatement. Unrecognizable patterns are more in line with confused or uncertain.

Yes, that works better.

Hypothesis: God has perfect knowledge.
Perfect knowledge reveals the beginning, the middle, and the end of any and all patterns.

Therefore:

- Does God have the capacity to know the pattern of a particular life?
- Or,
- For God, must perfect knowledge also include the unpredictability (ignorance) of human-involved patterns? (An unpredictability caused by human free will.)