Alternatively your reading is so bad that I didn’t even consider it a possibility.

This is just sad, I can’t even be bothered to be insulted. You’re wrong bro, go figure it out yourself.

Live footage of you coming up with these responses

It’s intended to

I think that’s intentional. It’s swapped in the first panel too. It appears more impartial this way.

Ah okay, that makes more sense. Thanks.

Right, but we were talking about how people were less concerned when men get sent to the death camps, and then you made the point that some protections don’t apply to men. You can see the connection. I don’t believe that’s the point you were intending to make but nonetheless I felt it was necessary to voice my disagreement for the sake of a complete discussion.

Colonization and immigration are meaningfully different though

I wouldn’t consider “not being sent to a death camp” to be an extra protection that only applies to specific groups of people, though

But we’re talking about a situation in which the protections are against unjust persecution. Selective lack of protections in this case is quite literally the same as selective persecution.

BREAKING: Water wet

Just get an even worse song stuck in your head, like this one: https://youtu.be/lrPncVUR_3Y

:D :D :D :D

5 guys burger with two patties, bacon, cheese, lettuce, tomato, grilled onion, and bbq sauce on a brioche bun (order number 44)

Nice catch. The carpet wear corroborates this.

Yeah

This is beautiful

So based on that statistic, we should treat them differently? This line of thinking leads to some very bad places.

Don’t lock people out of making valid arguments because they sound vaguely like arguments used by other people for negative means