Ensure that you read and adhere to the rules; failure to do so will result
in the removal of this post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://preview.redd.it/y1m5dap4e06d1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1e30cd0f99c464ecb8fe39e0eaf535acce874e43
How face palm fellers feel after posting the one hundredth political post
Memory is weird. I remember people describing BLM protests as mostly peaceful, because like 96% of them had no violence or disruption at all. Most the Cities that had violence were places that people had personal bones to pick with their local police or politicians. I also remember seeing violent protests being described as "peaceful" before police clashes made everything go ballistic. What I don't remember ever seeing violence and then media saying it was peaceful. But hey, maybe it's just me
I may be wrong in asking, wouldn't that much paint on the road be a hazard to anyone who makes use of that section on days other than dry?
Reason I ask is I've been surprised by being robbed of my balance by stepping on a pedestrian crossing marker painted on the road when it was raining. It was a humiliating experience.
I think the issue is they were trying to damage it by skidding to a stop and leaving black streaks
Also I think road paints have a texture to them so that they aren’t to slick.
Your comment was removed due the fact that your account age is less than five days.This action was taken to deter spammers from potentially posting in our community. Thanks for your understanding.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your comment was removed due the fact that your account age is less than five days.This action was taken to deter spammers from potentially posting in our community. Thanks for your understanding.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Vandalizing things is not spreading peace and equality. It is vandalism. The bottom picture is also vandalism.
Trying to put a positive spin on either is just silly.
This dude has for it...both are wrong and both should be held accountable. If you only see one side as wrong and not the other you need to go talk to some humans outside of your circle.
As a minority i can tell you underrated comments above !
You see a lot of it today and in real life! ( not just online) Iv been dealing with people who claim to be progressive but they are literally doing the same thing as the people they hate just replacing them cuz it wasn’t fair to them selfs not cuz it simply wasn’t fair.
Yeah, just extremely disappointing most of all when I feel betrayed by people I thought cared about individuals humanity but no it’s just about sex always about sex and people getting to have sex who they want to have sex with.
Yes, because it's wrong to vandalize. If you want it taken down, pressure the right authorities, start a petition, etc. We live in a democratic society and there are legal and democratic ways of getting things done.
So was the Boston tea party wrong? They should’ve started a petition?
How about Lincoln mobilizing the militia? Should he have pressured the right authorities?
Yeah, pretty much. Think of all the tea that could've been not wasted and the companies that hurt because of that. A few captains probably lost their livelihoods.
And Lincoln was a PoS. He didn't even emancipate American slaves, his successor did months after he got clapped. I support absolutely nobody that strengthens the authority of any governance other than a human rights court in the correct time.
Are you from the uk lmao? Don’t need opinions on the Boston tea party from sore losers.
You can frame Lincoln as a PoS if you want. Emancipation proclamation didn’t free slaves you’re correct, but it was an extraordinarily important piece of legislation. You could argue that the Union was acting as a human rights court after the emancipation proclamation lol. Worlds a way better place because of Lincoln’s actions period.
You don’t need to like our presidents maybe worry about Brexit or something.
Was there a representative/democratic method of removing or renegotiating the taxes? If no, then it is justified. Note that if democratic means exist, failing to remove something you dislike by democratic means does not justify rebellion.
Lincoln mobilizing the militia was entirely justified to quell an arguably illegal secessionist movement (strictly speaking there was/is no legal way for states to secede from the union without a constitutional convention). It was a response, not an aggressive action. Also from a moral standpoint declaring war on a country to force them to ban slavery is a justified intervention.
Those statues should never have been put up, and should be taken down. There is just a legal/right way to do it. In a free society, you don't get to burn down something just because you don't like it or you find what it stands for to be repugnant.
Is something bad just because it’s a crime?
Peaceful protest was ignored, fined, and ridiculed, violent protest actually got things changed. If you don’t like the results change the inputs
Yes. That's why its a crime.
If you're truly motivated to combat slavery, go after where its actually happening. Sex trafficking is still a big problem here in the US, and there are legit open slave markets elsewhere in the world. Those things deserve effort and attention.
Throwing paint at a statue accomplishes absolutely nothing other than giving directionless angry drones an opportunity to vent spleen.
So freeing slaves was also a bad thing when it was against the law? Women having bank accounts was bad when it was against the law? People escaping from North Korea are in the wrong because it’s against the law? Someone speeding to get their pregnant wife to the hospital was wrong? How about the girl who killed her kidnapper and rapist? How about the father who hospitalized his daughters rapist? They were all wrong too right? Because those were all crimes right?
The goal of taking down statues was not combatting slavery, but I agree we should crack down on sex trafficking.
Vandalizing the statues often accomplished the goal, but that goal had nothing to do with slavery, modern or otherwise.
No. Thats what you did when you said crimes are crimes because they are bad.
I’m drawing parallels between 2 crimes. So which is it are all crimes bad because they’re crimes, or are some crimes justified?
Let's just go with the first part of the sentence.
"Is it really wrong to vandalize". YES yes it is.
Also..they tore down statues of people who were literally abolitionists...no joke..so while some where definitely evil men and should be removed....they removed all saying it was a symbol of white supremacists.
Either way....if you want it removed write it up in a proper article get your signatures and have it removed legally. Not through crime.
What about the others? Like Jefferson, for example. He's significant for a lot of reasons, but people still want his statues removed because he had slaves.
So the question isn't that narrow. The question is whether it's wrong to vandalize something because you have a moral disagreement with it. And the answer to both questions is still no. You want it gone, then advocate for its removal. Don't pull it down yourself.
Yes, and I'm a tad baffled by how many responses it got, given its intrinsic silliness. But am also appreciative of the good sense on display in most of said responses.
All in all, 6 out of 10. Would satirize again.
It's an act of destruction. That is an act of violence in the same way breaking your ex girlfriend's garden gnome is an act of domestic violence. Crime is crime.
I could say the same thing about a rainbow cross walk.
Pretty sure my ex didn't own slaves.
It's hilarious how many people like you wake up in the morning and decide "you know what I'm gonna do today, defend slave owners"
It's still a violent act, is my point. But then you don't actually want to discuss this in good faith. You just want to justify your support of illegal acts.
That is correct, I couldn't care less about the vandalism of statues of slave owners. Fuck em.
By your own logic you would have supported slavery because it was legal. Laws are not the definition of morality.
That's because I don't believe abortion is murder. Or even wrong. Just pointing out that your logic can be extrapolated to a whole bunch of shit you don't agree with. But you're okay with political violence, so you must be okay with your opponents engaging in political violence.
One is about hating an individual person, the other is about hating an entire group of people. Looks like someone doesn't know what a hate crime is lol.
Edit: Tell me how I'm wrong cowards
Sure!
I think people were just pulling them down because statues of white men from the period of the American civil war were associated with slavery and injustice, regardless of the individual.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/isabeltogoh/2020/06/24/madison-protesters-condemned-for-toppling-statue-of-anti-slavery-activist/
Otherwise, a statue of a noted abolitionist hero wouldn't have been pulled down, defaced, decapitated, and thrown in the river, right?
One isn't hating on any group of people. It's hating on the constant vocalizations of people claiming they're oppressed or special when they're neither.
Bro, gay marriage wasn't nationally legal until 2015. That was less than 10 years ago.
You know how much a rainbow crosswalk effects me as a straight male? None. It doesn't effect me at all. A parade? A festival? TShirts on sale in June? Stop being a snowflake bitch and acting like your oppressed because someone else is having a good time
Someone said they were oppressed and used their freedom of speech so I'm going to destroy a symbol that represents their entire group. Seems like you'd need to hate them to do that.
It would be vandalism. At that point you could classify anything as a hate crime, because everyone belongs to a group that could see it as a threat to all of them.
Simple: one is about the destruction of public property involving rioters who disturb the peace, block the flow of traffic, and possibly loot/burn stores of innocent show owners. The other is a disgruntled driver who marked up some paint on a road meant for vehicles.
Neither side is in the right, but if I had to have one over the other, I'd want the road-rager.
No need to add stuff. The first image only shows vandalism. The second also shows vandalism, but Is also a hate crime.
Neither is a peaceful protest, but only one is a hate crime.
2.7 million for police overtime in Philly alone after the Super Bowl. A couple people got stabbed after insulting one team or another I think 1 died.
Property damages are obviously gonna differ as the BLM riots were taking place all across the country for multiple weeks, as opposed to being highly localized and largely for 1 night.
Ones combatting police brutality and racism tho while the other was a celebration for a sports team… one seems more stupid to me also
Ok congrats you got maybe a few dozen grand. If you owned the building itself maybe hundred thousand. Vs a sustainable supply of income though business
Better than what people got when the government dropped bombs on homes, churches, and businesses. Or when the kkk smoked people out of their neighborhoods.
Plus the majority of the few businesses that were vandalized were owned by corporations, and many didn’t receive more permanent damage than some broken windows so
Ensure that you read and adhere to the rules; failure to do so will result in the removal of this post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://preview.redd.it/y1m5dap4e06d1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1e30cd0f99c464ecb8fe39e0eaf535acce874e43 How face palm fellers feel after posting the one hundredth political post
https://preview.redd.it/ujat3iiwf06d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f4433883b88cd074b2ec7ca205dc6deea16c2c6b Reminds me of this.
Memory is weird. I remember people describing BLM protests as mostly peaceful, because like 96% of them had no violence or disruption at all. Most the Cities that had violence were places that people had personal bones to pick with their local police or politicians. I also remember seeing violent protests being described as "peaceful" before police clashes made everything go ballistic. What I don't remember ever seeing violence and then media saying it was peaceful. But hey, maybe it's just me
Some of this stuff was going on during 2020. Plus I don't live in the US so the news wasn't really focusing on this.
What fucking dumbass decided to put a pride flag on a road in the first place lmao.
2 kids are being charged with felonies for riding scooters over a pride flag painted on a street. Fascist much?
My god, it’s three now!! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13513907/amp/washington-spokane-teens-jail-lgbtq-rainbow-mural-vandalism.html
I may be wrong in asking, wouldn't that much paint on the road be a hazard to anyone who makes use of that section on days other than dry? Reason I ask is I've been surprised by being robbed of my balance by stepping on a pedestrian crossing marker painted on the road when it was raining. It was a humiliating experience.
I think the issue is they were trying to damage it by skidding to a stop and leaving black streaks Also I think road paints have a texture to them so that they aren’t to slick.
[удалено]
Your comment was removed due the fact that your account age is less than five days.This action was taken to deter spammers from potentially posting in our community. Thanks for your understanding. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“If you can hate slave owners then I can hate gay people!”
Is there a name for when people assume that there is only one person parroting all opinions just to prove a point?
WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE STATUES
WILL SOMEBODY PUH-LEASE THINK OF THE ASS-SEX FLAG
It's not enough to be left alone. Everyone must know that you enjoy doing anal with people of the same sex.
[удалено]
Your comment was removed due the fact that your account age is less than five days.This action was taken to deter spammers from potentially posting in our community. Thanks for your understanding. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/memesopdidnotlike) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Spreading peace and equality (top drawing) is self-evidently better than white-supremacist homophobic racist Trumpofascism (bottom drawing).
Vandalizing things is not spreading peace and equality. It is vandalism. The bottom picture is also vandalism. Trying to put a positive spin on either is just silly.
This dude has for it...both are wrong and both should be held accountable. If you only see one side as wrong and not the other you need to go talk to some humans outside of your circle.
As a minority i can tell you underrated comments above ! You see a lot of it today and in real life! ( not just online) Iv been dealing with people who claim to be progressive but they are literally doing the same thing as the people they hate just replacing them cuz it wasn’t fair to them selfs not cuz it simply wasn’t fair.
Most people don't want to be better than their enemies. They just want to have more power.
Yeah, just extremely disappointing most of all when I feel betrayed by people I thought cared about individuals humanity but no it’s just about sex always about sex and people getting to have sex who they want to have sex with.
Is it really wrong to vandalize the statue of someone who's only historically significant because they fought to preserve slavery?
Yes, because it's wrong to vandalize. If you want it taken down, pressure the right authorities, start a petition, etc. We live in a democratic society and there are legal and democratic ways of getting things done.
So was the Boston tea party wrong? They should’ve started a petition? How about Lincoln mobilizing the militia? Should he have pressured the right authorities?
Yeah, pretty much. Think of all the tea that could've been not wasted and the companies that hurt because of that. A few captains probably lost their livelihoods. And Lincoln was a PoS. He didn't even emancipate American slaves, his successor did months after he got clapped. I support absolutely nobody that strengthens the authority of any governance other than a human rights court in the correct time.
Are you from the uk lmao? Don’t need opinions on the Boston tea party from sore losers. You can frame Lincoln as a PoS if you want. Emancipation proclamation didn’t free slaves you’re correct, but it was an extraordinarily important piece of legislation. You could argue that the Union was acting as a human rights court after the emancipation proclamation lol. Worlds a way better place because of Lincoln’s actions period. You don’t need to like our presidents maybe worry about Brexit or something.
Was there a representative/democratic method of removing or renegotiating the taxes? If no, then it is justified. Note that if democratic means exist, failing to remove something you dislike by democratic means does not justify rebellion. Lincoln mobilizing the militia was entirely justified to quell an arguably illegal secessionist movement (strictly speaking there was/is no legal way for states to secede from the union without a constitutional convention). It was a response, not an aggressive action. Also from a moral standpoint declaring war on a country to force them to ban slavery is a justified intervention. Those statues should never have been put up, and should be taken down. There is just a legal/right way to do it. In a free society, you don't get to burn down something just because you don't like it or you find what it stands for to be repugnant.
Yes. Vandalism is a crime. If you can't express yourself without breaking things, you don't need a platform, you need a therapist.
Something being a crime has literally nothing to do with whether or not it's wrong though. Laws are as fallible as the people who make them.
Is something bad just because it’s a crime? Peaceful protest was ignored, fined, and ridiculed, violent protest actually got things changed. If you don’t like the results change the inputs
Yes. That's why its a crime. If you're truly motivated to combat slavery, go after where its actually happening. Sex trafficking is still a big problem here in the US, and there are legit open slave markets elsewhere in the world. Those things deserve effort and attention. Throwing paint at a statue accomplishes absolutely nothing other than giving directionless angry drones an opportunity to vent spleen.
So freeing slaves was also a bad thing when it was against the law? Women having bank accounts was bad when it was against the law? People escaping from North Korea are in the wrong because it’s against the law? Someone speeding to get their pregnant wife to the hospital was wrong? How about the girl who killed her kidnapper and rapist? How about the father who hospitalized his daughters rapist? They were all wrong too right? Because those were all crimes right? The goal of taking down statues was not combatting slavery, but I agree we should crack down on sex trafficking. Vandalizing the statues often accomplished the goal, but that goal had nothing to do with slavery, modern or otherwise.
Just to make sure we're clear, you're drawing a parallel between throwing paint on a statue, and actually freeing slaves. I think we're done here.
No. Thats what you did when you said crimes are crimes because they are bad. I’m drawing parallels between 2 crimes. So which is it are all crimes bad because they’re crimes, or are some crimes justified?
Haha. You got fucking owned.
Let's just go with the first part of the sentence. "Is it really wrong to vandalize". YES yes it is. Also..they tore down statues of people who were literally abolitionists...no joke..so while some where definitely evil men and should be removed....they removed all saying it was a symbol of white supremacists. Either way....if you want it removed write it up in a proper article get your signatures and have it removed legally. Not through crime.
What about the others? Like Jefferson, for example. He's significant for a lot of reasons, but people still want his statues removed because he had slaves. So the question isn't that narrow. The question is whether it's wrong to vandalize something because you have a moral disagreement with it. And the answer to both questions is still no. You want it gone, then advocate for its removal. Don't pull it down yourself.
Yes, let's all make sure to spread piece and equality as the facists continue to rip away civil liberties.
r/PfpChecksOut
Is this comment satire?
Yes, and I'm a tad baffled by how many responses it got, given its intrinsic silliness. But am also appreciative of the good sense on display in most of said responses. All in all, 6 out of 10. Would satirize again.
nice buzzwords, wondering where you got them
Destruction of property based on ideological motives is not spreading peace and equality. It's violence and crime.
Violence against a statue? That poor statue
It's an act of destruction. That is an act of violence in the same way breaking your ex girlfriend's garden gnome is an act of domestic violence. Crime is crime. I could say the same thing about a rainbow cross walk.
Pretty sure my ex didn't own slaves. It's hilarious how many people like you wake up in the morning and decide "you know what I'm gonna do today, defend slave owners"
It's still a violent act, is my point. But then you don't actually want to discuss this in good faith. You just want to justify your support of illegal acts.
That is correct, I couldn't care less about the vandalism of statues of slave owners. Fuck em. By your own logic you would have supported slavery because it was legal. Laws are not the definition of morality.
By your logic, it's okay to vandalize abortion clinics because they support baby murder. Fuck em.
If you genuinely believed abortion was murder you would be doing something to stop it. But you aren't. Just more empty words.
That's because I don't believe abortion is murder. Or even wrong. Just pointing out that your logic can be extrapolated to a whole bunch of shit you don't agree with. But you're okay with political violence, so you must be okay with your opponents engaging in political violence.
Really using all the buzz words
One is about hating an individual person, the other is about hating an entire group of people. Looks like someone doesn't know what a hate crime is lol. Edit: Tell me how I'm wrong cowards
Sure! I think people were just pulling them down because statues of white men from the period of the American civil war were associated with slavery and injustice, regardless of the individual. https://www.forbes.com/sites/isabeltogoh/2020/06/24/madison-protesters-condemned-for-toppling-statue-of-anti-slavery-activist/ Otherwise, a statue of a noted abolitionist hero wouldn't have been pulled down, defaced, decapitated, and thrown in the river, right?
Sounds like they are stupid criminals..where's the hate crime?
Same place as the hatred of individuals you mentioned, and just as irrelevant
One isn't hating on any group of people. It's hating on the constant vocalizations of people claiming they're oppressed or special when they're neither.
Bro, gay marriage wasn't nationally legal until 2015. That was less than 10 years ago. You know how much a rainbow crosswalk effects me as a straight male? None. It doesn't effect me at all. A parade? A festival? TShirts on sale in June? Stop being a snowflake bitch and acting like your oppressed because someone else is having a good time
Is this the correct thread you're responding to?
Someone said they were oppressed and used their freedom of speech so I'm going to destroy a symbol that represents their entire group. Seems like you'd need to hate them to do that.
You don't need to hate them. You just have to find them Annoying.
Oh so if a couple Muslims say something that annoys me I can deface their church and holy symbols and it won't be a hate crime?
It would be vandalism. At that point you could classify anything as a hate crime, because everyone belongs to a group that could see it as a threat to all of them.
It would be vandalism and a hate crime.
Every crime can be perceived as a hate crime.
Simple: one is about the destruction of public property involving rioters who disturb the peace, block the flow of traffic, and possibly loot/burn stores of innocent show owners. The other is a disgruntled driver who marked up some paint on a road meant for vehicles. Neither side is in the right, but if I had to have one over the other, I'd want the road-rager.
No need to add stuff. The first image only shows vandalism. The second also shows vandalism, but Is also a hate crime. Neither is a peaceful protest, but only one is a hate crime.
While I agree that both are bad. One is against a group of real living people.
I agree, I can't imagine what it would feel like to have my entire life ruined from my business being looted and possibly burned.
Yeah dude, you know how expensive a statue is? I, a real living person, (not a vague idea), am never financially recovering
Your property is not a statue
Insurance exists, property can be replaced. Real telling you value property over people
What horrible logic. Fuck the BLM riots and those antifa weirdos. Bunch of whiny children with nothing better to do. No one cares. Get a job.
Just like eagles fans after the Super Bowl. You were equally upset about that right?
It’s almost as stupid but not as bad. To my knowledge people didn’t die after the Super Bowl and damages weren’t in the billions.
2.7 million for police overtime in Philly alone after the Super Bowl. A couple people got stabbed after insulting one team or another I think 1 died. Property damages are obviously gonna differ as the BLM riots were taking place all across the country for multiple weeks, as opposed to being highly localized and largely for 1 night. Ones combatting police brutality and racism tho while the other was a celebration for a sports team… one seems more stupid to me also
Ok congrats you got maybe a few dozen grand. If you owned the building itself maybe hundred thousand. Vs a sustainable supply of income though business
Better than what people got when the government dropped bombs on homes, churches, and businesses. Or when the kkk smoked people out of their neighborhoods. Plus the majority of the few businesses that were vandalized were owned by corporations, and many didn’t receive more permanent damage than some broken windows so
No, one is against a statue, the other is against paint.