this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024
200 points (98.1% liked)

Not The Onion

12368 readers
489 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Right-wing pundit Dick Morris was speaking from what appeared to be a living room as the man strolled through.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 42 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

So close to being great, but that "decision of the community" threw it all off. Why is it up to the community to restrict individual liberty?

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Seems in line with some of the more "grounded" conservative opinions on how the Federal government and the states should run things tbh. We may disagree with them but it's not downright stupid or anti democratic at least...

[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

It is, but not on its own. Only when compared to the larger canon of conservative thought in which these principles are only applied to things they have preference against.

If a conservative doesn't like it and the federal government is protecting it it's a states rights issue. If a conservative does like it and the federal government isn't protecting it it's a constitutional issue.

There is no well reasoned principal backing these beliefs. It's merely a facade of justification put on top of preferences.

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Agreed. But hey at least it's not a completely batshit insane opinion I guess! This is how low the bar is currently

[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

For someone who ostensibly believes in small government, a marriage should be seen as a contract between consenting adults. There is absolutely no reason ANY greater organization, whether the government, the community, the church, or whatever it is, should be making decisions about who can and cannot qualify for engaging in that contract.

This guy's entire comment is a smokescreen hiding his actual opinion. He invokes the courts jamming it down our throats... that is their job: to limit the activities of government when government overreaches. Bans or restrictions on gay marriage ARE an overreach. A "true" advocate for small government should be happy the courts are telling the government no when it overreaches -- but he isn't happy about it. Because he's, like most conservatives, full of shit.

The entire thing betrays that he doesn't actually give a shit about small government. He wants government right up in peoples' business. He wants you to share your bedsheets with government. He's an insane, evil fuck because anyone who thinks the government should be involved in restricting marriage at ANY level is an insane, evil fuck.