Brexit

Anything and everything.

Brexit

by Manijure » Wed Jun 22, 2016 11:57 am

This is more directed to Kingmaker, Razor, and warbot, since they are the only ones in the forums who I know (at the moment) live in Great Britain, although I would also love to hear everyone else's opinion. What is your stance on the Brexit issue (whether Great Britain leaves the EU or not)? As someone living in the US, there is not too much I know about what's going on in Great Britain, aside from Jo Cox's tragic and brutal murder, and the fact that she strongly supported staying. If I had to pick, I would want Great Britain to stay, but I figure you (Kingmaker) are the most informed of the arguments of each side.
Last edited by Manijure on Thu Jun 23, 2016 3:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Carpe diem. Seize the day, boys. Make your lives extraordinary."
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: Somewhere

Re: Brexit

by The Kingmaker » Wed Jun 22, 2016 3:45 pm

Well I am left-leaning politically and thus am biased towards remaining.

Tbh (trying to be unbiased but it's really impossible with how ridiculous these debates are) the case to remain does have more evidence and notable backers, whereas the leave campaign has the support of the Murdoch Press which influences a large number of people.

In terms of factual numbers and studied and evidence it generally is suggested that remaining would be better, but the arguments of the leave lot are that they are biased or wrong or something similar. I can't fully understand the argument to remain, like I get wanting control and it not being in people you don't know and can't influence, but the EU's record is really great on most matters. The leaders of the leave debate come across as stupid (Boris, but he's thoroughly cunning underneath all that), misguided (Gove) or as (not so) closeted racists (farage)

Jo Cox is shocking and really astounding. She wasn't even one of the major players or vocal fronts of a campaign, she seemed like a nice person who was MP of her constituency and was campaigning for what she believed in. It's really shocking. The whole "death to traitors" thing is worse. There is inbred racism and xenophobia, but wow that's a step further than I thought would ever happen.

Tbh I blame the Murdoch press and its monopoly on Working Class people if we leave (not to sound up my own arse, their papers cover a few demographics, but the Sun and The Times are plain and simple Tabloids) because so many people know so little and care so little either side of the debate that such biased trash being recorded as truth and slammed out repeatedly every day influences many people.
"Aragorn: [Elvish] Sit down, Legolas."
Image

My treasured creations:
The Oddities, The Four Elementals, Gathering Twilight
The Community Improves Heroes
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 1899
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 4:42 pm
Location: A stage (but all the world's a stage)

Re: Brexit

by Manijure » Wed Jun 22, 2016 7:31 pm

Yeah, I've heard how nasty the politics behind Brexit have been. One article I read on CNN compared it to Trump's campaign, and I can certainly see why with all the propaganda and scare tactics to voters. The fact that Jo Cox was murdered just because of this issue... I read her biography on Wikipedia, and it is clear she stands on the nicer and more benevolent side of politics. It pains me to see people like her killed by the depraved and heartless.

Regardless, as objective I can be, there seemingly will be a lot more ramifications if Great Britain leaves than if it stays. The world is a globalized economy (Great Britain having the 5th strongest economy), and leaving the EU will tip the scales drastically, not just for Great Britain itself, but also for the EU, NATO, US, and every other un-isolated country on Earth. I have heard about Greece's financial crisis in the past couple of years, and the burden the EU has to carry to try to solve it, but I don't think detaching itself from the problem (and numerous other problems) will help the country. If anything, Great Britain will just garner more financial and economic issues, with no further help from the EU.
"Carpe diem. Seize the day, boys. Make your lives extraordinary."
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: Somewhere

Re: Brexit

by Zonoro13 » Wed Jun 22, 2016 10:58 pm

The EU is a far-left shithole.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/05 ... sts-power/

What started as a logical economic agreement eventually grew to be political as well, and the EU is gradually becoming more powerful. Meanwhile, individual countries have less and less of a say: Britain has only 10% or so of the EU vote. Meaning they can do very little against a majority. While the EU's policies been too harmful to GB yet, if they ever did, they would have no options. Just because EU interests align with GB interests now doesn't mean they always will.

There's also the factor of immigration. Anyone with an EU passport can immigrate to Britain, and anyone who legally immigrates to an EU country has an EU passport. Meaning the EU country with the laxest immigration leaves the entire EU vulnerable. The EU doesn't regulate or mandate this to my knowledge. While uncontrollable immigration is not necessarily a problem, it may be in the future - and if GB remains, they will be unable to control that immigration. I am not saying that GB should significantly inhibit or control immigration; my point is that they, as a sovereign nation, should have the option to do that. This brings me to my next point.

Britain is a nation. Its people should have a democratic control over its government. They should not have to follow policies they do not want to just because the EU implemented them. The larger a democratic nation becomes, the less power each individual or community has to govern itself. Britain will do fine on its own.

Britain is the 5th largest economy in the world. It will have no problem making new trade deals. The economic turmoil of leaving the EU will be short-term. The consequences of giving up sovereignty as a nation? Very, very long-term.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
-Terry Pratchett

Is this the latest dank meme? -Pencil
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 5167
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:43 pm
Location: memes

Re: Brexit

by Pencil » Thu Jun 23, 2016 1:00 am

Ooh drama, politics, suspense in the IH forums

Look, regardless of your political agenda, the EU brings something that the world desperately needs: some semblance of cooperation and union.

Also Ale.
User avatar
Ironhide Developer
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:42 pm
Location: Ahm an Arteest

Re: Brexit

by Zonoro13 » Thu Jun 23, 2016 1:31 am

Pencil wrote:Ooh drama, politics, suspense in the IH forums

Look, regardless of your political agenda, the EU brings something that the world desperately needs: some semblance of cooperation and union.

Also Ale.

Ah! A globalist! Run!
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
-Terry Pratchett

Is this the latest dank meme? -Pencil
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 5167
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:43 pm
Location: memes

Re: Brexit

by Juice Box » Thu Jun 23, 2016 5:16 am

I don't know much about this, so excuse me for my lack of knowledge, but can someone explain to me why some people want GB to move away in the first place?

Also, who is Jo Cox and why did she die?
User
 
Posts: 2118
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 4:54 am

Re: Brexit

by The Kingmaker » Thu Jun 23, 2016 8:05 am

Afaik (I'm not in their mindset) the pro-leave people are either politically minded rich people who don't want regulations from people in the EU who they can't payoff, the closet racists and xenophobes of UKIP and the conniving little snakes that want to be stories to be united Tories but don't want to be United with Europe.

And the poorer people without University degrees (I'm not degrading them, I considered not going to Uni for quite a long time) who believe the words of the Tabloid press (owned by Rupert Murdoch, a Thatcherite and one of those who don't want to be regulated by people who they can't bribe) as gospel and beleive that the storm of migrants will steal their jobs and rape their wives and take over their towns. Actually it's a tiny number immigrating the UK, in either refugees or economic migrants, with no geographical concentration, forming their own groups because we hate them so much and keeping themselves to themselves while being hardworking dedicated workers FILLING A SKILLS GAP IN OUR JOBS MARKET NOT OCCUPIED BY OUR OWN WORKERS and helping fight against our ageing population.

That the other one: racist old people whose views haven't aged and changed with them, leaving them archaic now. Tbh there should be a cap on voting age imo because f yore only gonna be here for a few more years, what right do you have for the 16 and 17 year olds who can't vote for what is ultimately their future and their future alone.

Jo Cox was the Labour candidate for election in her constituency (how we divide our country when we vote). Because she won, she became the MP (Member of Parliament) for that area, representing it at Parliamentary debates. She wasn't assigned a job in the Shadow cabinet (the opposition to current government, Labour atm as the Conservaives won the last election overall) so campaigned for general points she and her constituency believed in. She was a staunch Remain voter and was campaigning thusly when someone walked up to her while she was going from door to door urging people to vote Remain and shot her and stabbed her.
She died a few hours later in hospital.
As for why? The guy gave his name as "death to traitors, freedom to Britain" and it's been said he needs to be evaluated by a psychiatrist.
"Aragorn: [Elvish] Sit down, Legolas."
Image

My treasured creations:
The Oddities, The Four Elementals, Gathering Twilight
The Community Improves Heroes
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 1899
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 4:42 pm
Location: A stage (but all the world's a stage)

Re: Brexit

by Zonoro13 » Thu Jun 23, 2016 1:03 pm

Juice Box wrote:I don't know much about this, so excuse me for my lack of knowledge, but can someone explain to me why some people want GB to move away in the first place?

Also, who is Jo Cox and why did she die?

If Britain today was not part of the EU and was voting on entering it, I can say almost certainly that they would not. Leave supporters just don't want to be a part of a growingly undemocratic and political group.

Kingmaker, your post has a ton of assumptions and generalisations about leavers. Calling us bigots and xenophobes is blatant fear-mongering, just like calling remainers euro-loving scum. Both are harmful.

Did you use Thatcherite as a slur? Margaret Thatcher was a hero.

You've got a strawman in your immigration argument. Hardly anyone among the leavers thinks GB should stop skilled foreign workers from immigrating. The point is that as a nation GB has the right to control it's immigration. Not even that it should.

Old people have a human right to vote just as all people do. They have opinions too.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
-Terry Pratchett

Is this the latest dank meme? -Pencil
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 5167
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:43 pm
Location: memes

Re: Brexit

by Juice Box » Thu Jun 23, 2016 2:18 pm

Zonoro13 wrote:Old people have a human right to vote just as all people do. They have opinions too.


I don't think it's a question of whether they have opinions or not, it's a question of whether they have informed opinions or not. Because let's face it, having opinions does not mean you are automatically eligible to vote, because no, you are not and should not be entitled to your opinion. You are entitled only to your informed opinion, an opinion that is based on real facts and valid evidence.

Like, let's say there's a dude who believes Islam should be banned from a country because ISIS is an Islamic terror group. Would you give a man like that power to vote on such a case? Of course not, heck I'd beat him with a stick and throw rocks at him. Because it isn't about whether you have an opinion or not, it's about whether your opinion is valid enough to warrant a vote.

The Kingmaker wrote:Afaik (I'm not in their mindset) the pro-leave people are either politically minded rich people who don't want regulations from people in the EU who they can't payoff, the closet racists and xenophobes of UKIP and the conniving little snakes that want to be stories to be united Tories but don't want to be United with Europe.


I'm not really one to believe in claims like that? Like, okay, sure, maybe some people in Pro-Leave are bigots, as you say. But why do they want to leave? What benefits does it give? And how can it outweigh the benefits of staying?

Also, what happened to the guy who killed Jo Cox? People like that really shouldn't be let loose so easily. I've personally always been a firm believer in capital punishment, but shit, if you can go beyond that, cause mental or even physical pain to those who commit crimes while keeping them alive, then that would be great. I don't give a shit if "it's not God's will," because damn, God doesn't give a shit. And I don't care if the guy has some glorious excuse, either. Your uncle beat you when you were young? Your parents died in a car accident? Shit, cry me a river and get over it. You did something wrong, suck it up and be a man. Human life is the single most valuable resource open to us, and the only price that can pay back the loss of a human life is another human life.
User
 
Posts: 2118
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 4:54 am

Re: Brexit

by warbot1000 » Thu Jun 23, 2016 2:33 pm

Me and razor are in the uk as well.
I think the in campaign is better and TBH if you are England all of the campaigns are just confusing and full of lies or uncertain facts. I mean both campaigns say that businesses support them and say other things like that but one thing is clear going out of the EU is a leap into the dark and is less safe than staying in the EU. That's why I am leaning towards staying inside the EU.

my ideas
http://www.ironhidegames.com/forums/vie ... =15&t=4760
I am master of the elements, student of goku and digimon king
My friends an I fight for good beware of warbot the humanrobot!!

If its not JB its not right!
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 1787
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:26 pm
Location: a Magical place over the rainbow ENGLAND

Re: Brexit

by Manijure » Thu Jun 23, 2016 2:34 pm

Juice Box wrote:
I'm not really one to believe in claims like that? Like, okay, sure, maybe some people in Pro-Leave are bigots, as you say. But why do they want to leave? What benefits does it give? And how can it outweigh the benefits of staying?


From what I have heard, the Leavers feel that Great Britain is burdened by EU's policies and want more independence (with a few of them citing the American Revolution for some reason). Being in the EU means having a sort of responsibility for other countries, like dealing with Greece's financial hell, and some people are not happy with it. If they leave, they have more freedom and are not bound to the rules that the EU has placed. And plus, immigration is somewhat of an issue in GB, and apparently withdrawing from the EU would help remedy it (I guess because EU has specific immigration laws).

I honestly do not see how the pros of leaving would outweigh the pros of staying. The world economy will go way out of balance, and while yes, Great Britain has many resources to be self-sufficient and independent short-term, in the long-term, their economy is at risk in falling to a recession, and they would most likely not receive any help from the EU.
"Carpe diem. Seize the day, boys. Make your lives extraordinary."
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: Somewhere

Re: Brexit

by Zonoro13 » Thu Jun 23, 2016 2:49 pm

Juice Box wrote:
Zonoro13 wrote:Old people have a human right to vote just as all people do. They have opinions too.


I don't think it's a question of whether they have opinions or not, it's a question of whether they have informed opinions or not. Because let's face it, having opinions does not mean you are automatically eligible to vote, because no, you are not and should not be entitled to your opinion. You are entitled only to your informed opinion, an opinion that is based on real facts and valid evidence.

That's not how voting works. In a democracy, each citizen is given one vote. Having opinions does not make you automatically eligible to vote, but living in the country sure does. People are entitled to vote based on their opinions whether they are informed or not, whether you agree with them or not. It is a basic right.

Informed voting should be encouraged, but you can't ban people from voting based on age or quality of opinion. That sounds eerily like literacy tests.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
-Terry Pratchett

Is this the latest dank meme? -Pencil
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 5167
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:43 pm
Location: memes

Re: Brexit

by Juice Box » Thu Jun 23, 2016 3:13 pm

Zonoro13 wrote:That's not how voting works. In a democracy, each citizen is given one vote. Having opinions does not make you automatically eligible to vote, but living in the country sure does. People are entitled to vote based on their opinions whether they are informed or not, whether you agree with them or not. It is a basic right.

Informed voting should be encouraged, but you can't ban people from voting based on age or quality of opinion. That sounds eerily like literacy tests.


That's always been a major flaw in democracy, in my opinion. You give literally anyone the power to vote on behalf of his country just because he lives there. Sugarcoating it with petty words like "it is a basic right" doesn't make it any better. You can never guarantee for sure that someone's vote is of sound reasoning; he could just be a racist who doesn't like black candidates or a sexist who doesn't like female candidates. Granted, there are bound to be decent men with valid opinions and decent research to back their claims, but you can never truly get rid of the bigots. Giving the power of choice to an uninformed majority is a horrible thing.

I've always thought countries should be run by the opposite: an informed minority, like maybe a small group of people who know in detail what they're voting on and what it means for the country as a whole. Making ten thousand informed individuals decide an important matter is better than making millions of uninformed ones.

And honestly, I think people should be banned from voting based on their reasoning/quality of opinion/whatever. Votes should be as valid as possible, and if there is sufficient, legal evidence that suggests someone may not be capable of voting for a country's best interests, then by all means, remove his eligibility. A basic right like that can and should be ignored if it is for the benefit of a country as a whole.
User
 
Posts: 2118
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 4:54 am

Re: Brexit

by Manijure » Thu Jun 23, 2016 3:28 pm

Juice Box wrote:
Zonoro13 wrote:That's not how voting works. In a democracy, each citizen is given one vote. Having opinions does not make you automatically eligible to vote, but living in the country sure does. People are entitled to vote based on their opinions whether they are informed or not, whether you agree with them or not. It is a basic right.

Informed voting should be encouraged, but you can't ban people from voting based on age or quality of opinion. That sounds eerily like literacy tests.


That's always been a major flaw in democracy, in my opinion. You give literally anyone the power to vote on behalf of his country just because he lives there. Sugarcoating it with petty words like "it is a basic right" doesn't make it any better. You can never guarantee for sure that someone's vote is of sound reasoning; he could just be a racist who doesn't like black candidates or a sexist who doesn't like female candidates. Granted, there are bound to be decent men with valid opinions and decent research to back their claims, but you can never truly get rid of the bigots. Giving the power of choice to an uninformed majority is a horrible thing.

I've always thought countries should be run by the opposite: an informed minority, like maybe a small group of people who know in detail what they're voting on and what it means for the country as a whole. Making ten thousand informed individuals decide an important matter is better than making millions of uninformed ones.

And honestly, I think people should be banned from voting based on their reasoning/quality of opinion/whatever. Votes should be as valid as possible, and if there is sufficient, legal evidence that suggests someone may not be capable of voting for a country's best interests, then by all means, remove his eligibility. A basic right like that can and should be ignored if it is for the benefit of a country as a whole.


As much as I disagree with Zonoro on Brexit, I completely agree with him on voting. Opinions are opinions, meaning that "reasoning" and "informed" means differently to certain people. As much as some people's political opinions confuse and irritate me, I know they have their own form of reasoning and are in a way informed, whether I understand it or not. Everyone legal to vote has the right and deserves to vote. Democracy works because no one feels inferior to anyone else. If only a select minority has the right to vote, there would be so much unrest. Besides, how can you determine if someone is "informed" or not?
"Carpe diem. Seize the day, boys. Make your lives extraordinary."
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: Somewhere

Re: Brexit

by Zonoro13 » Thu Jun 23, 2016 4:20 pm

Juice Box wrote:I've always thought countries should be run by the opposite: an informed minority, like maybe a small group of people who know in detail what they're voting on and what it means for the country as a whole. Making ten thousand informed individuals decide an important matter is better than making millions of uninformed ones.

It is unfair to have a government rule over people who do not have a say in that government. Democracy has been the backbone of civilization since ancient Greece. It is the only system that works well while remaining fair to its people.

Your post is basically saying that people should be banned from voting for thinking the wrong things.

Thanks Manijure for backing me up.
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
-Terry Pratchett

Is this the latest dank meme? -Pencil
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 5167
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:43 pm
Location: memes

Re: Brexit

by The Kingmaker » Thu Jun 23, 2016 4:29 pm

I've actually become quite disillusioned with voting after seeing a few of the alternative voting systems (like where you give 1-5 in terms of preference instead of just a cross)

Yeah I generalised, sorry.
Again, more generalisation, what I said was wrong and I've no idea what Zonoro is saying about the EY being broken and a sinking ship, and if it is I'd like to know because I'm in it (at least for now) but the overwhelming opinion here is I don't Care.

The only people who truly wanted this referendum were UkIP, and good for them they got it, but regular people are stuck with biased and broken information either side.
"Aragorn: [Elvish] Sit down, Legolas."
Image

My treasured creations:
The Oddities, The Four Elementals, Gathering Twilight
The Community Improves Heroes
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 1899
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 4:42 pm
Location: A stage (but all the world's a stage)

Re: Brexit

by Juice Box » Thu Jun 23, 2016 5:08 pm

Manijure wrote:As much as I disagree with Zonoro on Brexit, I completely agree with him on voting. Opinions are opinions, meaning that "reasoning" and "informed" means differently to certain people. As much as some people's political opinions confuse and irritate me, I know they have their own form of reasoning and are in a way informed, whether I understand it or not. Everyone legal to vote has the right and deserves to vote. Democracy works because no one feels inferior to anyone else. If only a select minority has the right to vote, there would be so much unrest. Besides, how can you determine if someone is "informed" or not?


That's the thing, though: it's hard to determine in a general population who exactly is "informed" and who isn't. They're just normal people, and you can't expect them to be able to thoroughly explain why a candidate should be voted on. There are of course people who do take the effort to give a shit--I love how some of you here are atleast aware of politics, even though I disagree with your opinions (I understand that Trump is the lesser evil compared to Hillary Cuntface, but seriously?) but you just can't expect everyone to do the same and care as much. Atleast with a dedicated, well-informed minority, that problem can be solved. You can make sure that voters are all licensed political practitioners who know what they're talking about, know how to see through political bullshit, and overall just know in detail everything about what they're voting for.

You can still trust the general populace--that process works fine and has been working fine for hundreds of years. But it could be better, especially in slower countries like mine, where it's hard to trust normal people with voting when most don't graduate high school and make a rough equivalent of three dollars a day.

Zonoro13 wrote:It is unfair to have a
government rule over people who do not have a say in that government. Democracy has been the backbone of civilization since ancient Greece. It is the only system that works well while remaining fair to its people.

Your post is basically saying that people should be banned from voting for thinking the wrong things.

Thanks Manijure for backing me up.


It's unfair? Who cares about unfair? Politics isn't about giving people what they want because it's "fair," it's about finding the best solution for the most people applicable for the longest amount of time. You cannot possibly think that every individual in a country possesses a valid vote just because they all live there; there are bound to be and always will be people who cast votes of unsound reasoning. Democracy does nothing to address this because it too heavily upholds meaningless ideals like "the rights of all" and "the freedom to choose," concepts that bog down a country's progress as much as it keeps it together.

I frankly don't care if not everyone is given the freedom to vote. But I DO care when votes are cast on the premise of invalid arguments and uninformed opinions. Yes, voting eligibility should be removed from people who "think wrong." Why shouldn't it? A vote made with no real evidence to back its claims, or a vote built upon false claims, is a vote that can be worthless, or even worse: dangerous, because voting is an act that involves the fate of a country as a whole. Simple peasantries like "basic human rights" and "the freedom to vote" should be altered, or even outright ignored, against something of such importance.
Last edited by Juice Box on Thu Jun 23, 2016 5:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User
 
Posts: 2118
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 4:54 am

Re: Brexit

by Manijure » Thu Jun 23, 2016 5:28 pm

Juice Box wrote:Politics isn't about giving people what they want because it's "fair," it's about finding the best solution for the most people applicable for the longest amount of time.


This is literally how democracy works. If you limit voting to a minority, a country cannot find the best solution for the most people because regardless of the fact that the minority is "well informed" as you say, they cannot and will not represent the people of the country as a whole. The thing you need to understand is that individuality is a core part of humanity; we each have our own ideals and beliefs. Who gets to be the judge of deciding if someone is "informed" if everyone is different? You cannot make a political system where "uninformed" people are barred from voting because it is simply unfeasible and biased.

And regarding claims, politicians don't say what they will do, they say what they will TRY to do. I do not vote for a candidate because I know something in particular will happen under his/her administration, but because I believe he or she will do everything in his or her power to make it happen. That being said, in the eyes of the public, a claim about something in the past can either be true or false depending on what you believe in. Some claims can be solely based on facts, but anyone can twist it into something of opinion, such as by emphasizing the wording or phrase of the claim. It can be interpreted in many different ways, and as such, the public as a whole never sees a claim as wholly "true" or "false."
"Carpe diem. Seize the day, boys. Make your lives extraordinary."
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: Somewhere

Re: Brexit

by Zonoro13 » Thu Jun 23, 2016 8:49 pm

Juice Box wrote:Yes, voting eligibility should be removed from people who "think wrong."

kek

Juice Box wrote:Simple peasantries like "basic human rights" and "the freedom to vote" should be altered, or even outright ignored, against something of such importance.

holy fucking shit you can't make this up
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
-Terry Pratchett

Is this the latest dank meme? -Pencil
User avatar
User
 
Posts: 5167
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:43 pm
Location: memes

Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 10 guests
cron