Main
THE MAIN RULE: ALL TEXT POSTS MUST CONTAIN "MAIN" OR BE ENTIRELY IMAGES (INLINE OR EMOJI)
(Temporary moratorium on main rule to encourage more posting on main. We reserve the right to arbitrarily enforce it whenever we wish and the right to strike this line and enforce mainposting with zero notification to the users because its funny)
A hexbear.net commainity. Main sure to subscribe to other communities as well. Your feed will become the Lion's Main!
Good comrades mainly sort posts by hot and comments by new!
State-by-state guide on maintaining firearm ownership
Domain guide on mutual aid and foodbank resources
Tips for looking at financials of non-profits (How to donate amainly)
Community-sourced megapost on the main media sources to radicalize libs and chuds with
Main Source for Feminism for Babies
Maintaining OpSec / Data Spring Cleaning guide
Remain up to date on what time is it in Moscow
view the rest of the comments
I wouldn't even say don't let people who have killed in, the basic line I think we should take is to look at it on a case by case basis. If they understand that what they did was wrong, they embrace marxism-leninism and they haven't killed or tortured civilians we should let them in.
You started with "Should the cops who killed unarmed black men let into the party?" I responded with "no those who commit war crimes (implying that we shouldn't let cops who murder unarmed black men or are complicit in that either) shouldn't be let in." You then said that "every troop in Iraq was a criminal" implying that all ex-cops shouldn't be let in as well. If you make a comparison between cops and soldiers, follow through. You're trying to get me to make your point for you by answering each question one at a time, just make your point.