365
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 42 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

In other news, threats of violence continue to be used because they're effective, film at 11.

Remember, guys. When you're criticizing companies like Target for this, remember that it's not the CEOs that have to deal with the fallout on a day-to-day basis. They're safe in their offices. It's the teenage cashiers and stock boys that have to bear the brunt of the threats. It's the rank-and-file employees, who have no say in the matter one way or the other and have no authority to do anything about it. They're the ones who have to deal with the crazy bastards who come in and start physically tearing things down. The ones who come in screaming and causing a scene. The employees who can't even do anything about the asshole, especially if he's uncooperative and refuses to leave. Sure, they could call the cops, who might show up 20 minutes later.

Yes, these companies should be supporting the LGBT community. But if doing so is literally going to put their rank-and-file employees at risk from violent bigots, I can at least understand why they're gun-shy. There's no possible way to stop a bigot from walking into any store and creating havoc to get their point across, and there are far more bigots out there who have already said they're willing to resort to violence than most people thought.

Look at it this way: You have a choice to make. You've got social media on one side telling you to take choice A because it's the right choice to make, and some nutjob(s) in your face, physically threatening you with violence until you take choice B. Which one are you going to choose?

"Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face." And everybody has an answer until they're the ones being threatened.

[-] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Honestly all this tells me is that peaceful movements and protests are seemingly far less effective than violence. So if the LGBT crowd wants to see change, then their going to have to get violent too.

I don't morally agree with it, but it feels hard to deny the realities about it.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Oh most definitely! Freedom is bought with blood.

Source: The whole of human history.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

In general, peaceful protests have been historically way more effective. But if you let the violent bigots get too far, especially into governments, you will have no other choice than to remove them with violence. I don't think the world is there yet, but if they are enabled further it "soon" will be.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 4 weeks ago

You may not morally agree but I morally encourage it, make those sonsovbitches bleed. Especially if theyre Seventh Day Adventist affiliates or outright part of.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago
[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

No notes? None? Dude’s message is “nothing is worth being bullied over” and you’re all-in? 🤔

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yup. Nothing is worth deciding someone else should get bullied for your decisions. People don't work retail because they want to deal with culture war problems.

This isnt life or death. It's selling rainbow themed products.

this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2024
365 points (98.4% liked)

politics

18080 readers
3770 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS