I'm sorry man, I just don't know how your comment follows from mine. I feel like you must have misunderstood something. You're being sarcastic about the 1st Amendment, but I don't know why.
Even this comment is a bit confusing. Are you saying I'm closed-minded, or your closed minded? "It's expected" doesn't clarify whom you're talking about. I'm seeing one of two possible statements: "If you do X, you should expect others to be closed minded" or "If you do X, I expect you to be closed minded".
I grant you that I'm being a little lazy by carbon-copying my own post, but I literally just wrote the parent comment for way too long, and it already contained everything I already said. I was going to end up adding the same words and ideas but in a different order.
And yeah, I am pretty sure I'm right about my interpretation, that's why I have it.
It follows because you wrote that State's Rights and Slavery are the same issue. I made a direct comparison to a modern day talking point, which is that Leftists say that all Free Speech whining is just people who want to say nigger. Aka "just the same issue." Which then means its far easier to justify all actions taken, because you've simplified it down to "only bad people care about this problem."
I called you closed minded because you were so self assured and high on your own "I'm smarter than everyone else" you don't even respond to a person, you just copy paste yourself.
Like I said, I wasn't going to write anything different than what I had already said but in a different order. That's not self-assured, it's just a bit lazy.
Leftists say that all Free Speech whining is just people who want to say nigger. Aka "just the same issue." Which then means its far easier to justify all actions taken, because you've simplified it down to "only bad people care about this problem."
Well, there's two problems there. Saying nigger is included in Free Speech, not the same subject. I'm saying States Rights regarding Slavery is the issue culturally, legally, and otherwise. The Leftists, as you note, are using it as a smear generally. I'm not using it as a smear because States Rights regarding Slavery involves both the Abolitionists arguing for total abolition and violating the south's state power on regulating slavery, the north arguing for a repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act (which was a violation of the free state's power on regulating slavery in their borders), and the south's argument that slavery should be perpetually expanded (because the restriction of slavery's expansion would weak their political and economic power generally) and that the feds couldn't regulate it unless it was in their favor..
This is the whole point, everybody argued their state's rights were already violated, and everybody argued that it had been violated regarding the legalization, abolition, or restriction of slavery. Then everybody proceeded to violate those state rights and tell everybody else to get fucked. No one being honest can argue that anyone, north or south, was for resisting federal power because both sides had been using and abusing federal power to their hearts content for decades. Like all bubbles, the commodity expands and concentrates until the whole bubble pops all at once. In this case, you had a power bubble that burst into a civil war because no one wanted to compromise, and no one wanted to settle.
I'm sorry man, I just don't know how your comment follows from mine. I feel like you must have misunderstood something. You're being sarcastic about the 1st Amendment, but I don't know why.
Even this comment is a bit confusing. Are you saying I'm closed-minded, or your closed minded? "It's expected" doesn't clarify whom you're talking about. I'm seeing one of two possible statements: "If you do X, you should expect others to be closed minded" or "If you do X, I expect you to be closed minded".
I grant you that I'm being a little lazy by carbon-copying my own post, but I literally just wrote the parent comment for way too long, and it already contained everything I already said. I was going to end up adding the same words and ideas but in a different order.
And yeah, I am pretty sure I'm right about my interpretation, that's why I have it.
It follows because you wrote that State's Rights and Slavery are the same issue. I made a direct comparison to a modern day talking point, which is that Leftists say that all Free Speech whining is just people who want to say nigger. Aka "just the same issue." Which then means its far easier to justify all actions taken, because you've simplified it down to "only bad people care about this problem."
I called you closed minded because you were so self assured and high on your own "I'm smarter than everyone else" you don't even respond to a person, you just copy paste yourself.
Like I said, I wasn't going to write anything different than what I had already said but in a different order. That's not self-assured, it's just a bit lazy.
Well, there's two problems there. Saying nigger is included in Free Speech, not the same subject. I'm saying States Rights regarding Slavery is the issue culturally, legally, and otherwise. The Leftists, as you note, are using it as a smear generally. I'm not using it as a smear because States Rights regarding Slavery involves both the Abolitionists arguing for total abolition and violating the south's state power on regulating slavery, the north arguing for a repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act (which was a violation of the free state's power on regulating slavery in their borders), and the south's argument that slavery should be perpetually expanded (because the restriction of slavery's expansion would weak their political and economic power generally) and that the feds couldn't regulate it unless it was in their favor..
This is the whole point, everybody argued their state's rights were already violated, and everybody argued that it had been violated regarding the legalization, abolition, or restriction of slavery. Then everybody proceeded to violate those state rights and tell everybody else to get fucked. No one being honest can argue that anyone, north or south, was for resisting federal power because both sides had been using and abusing federal power to their hearts content for decades. Like all bubbles, the commodity expands and concentrates until the whole bubble pops all at once. In this case, you had a power bubble that burst into a civil war because no one wanted to compromise, and no one wanted to settle.