That’s okay, according to @ASeriesOfPoorChoices, it’s because I am “going insane.” Gotta love an ableist. (I actually have mental illness, so I always love people who use it as a weapon.)
Dude, I normally agree with you, but not on this. You’re trying to set up a purity test for office. You might not use it that way, but the Repuglicans will.
Also do you really want to see your daughter’s entire browser history because you raised her well, and she decides to become a civil servant? Or worse, have it plastered all over the news? Think hard on that one.
FS is a weird one. Did you know he didn’t know that online coupons existed? like, at all? It started in a topic about Domino’s pizza (yes, he never knew Domino’s Pizza had coupons), and turns out it expanded to anything online, as he listed a bunch of websites that he was certain, just like Domino’s, didn’t have coupons. I’m not discrediting everything about him, but between this “privacy shouldn’t exist” stance and “everyone else is at fault for me never knowing that coupons existed on the internet”, I’m starting to wonder.
If she did something nefarious that the public should know about? Absolutely I do. I’m not why you think I would consider family a special case and I’m sorry you think that I’m that sort of hypocrite because I sure have never indicated I am.
(Also, I don’t know why people insist on telling me they normally agree with me when they disagree with me, but it happens all the time.)
Nah dude, I wasn’t calling you a hypocrite. I was trying to reframe it so that you could see how whatever her sexuality is would be weaponized against her. It’s a bad idea, for people that "have nothing to hide.
Would you want the world to know all the porn you ever looked at? Cause I wouldn’t, and from what I can tell, I’m into some pretty tame shit.
I wouldn’t run for office. And if you’re worried about that sort of thing and don’t want people to know about it, maybe you shouldn’t either. Because if they learn, you’ll be in a world of shit of your own making when you could have avoided it.
So let’s push normal people out of public office, and make sure to only have sociopaths who have no shame?
For example, I looked up a spider monkey’s vagina because a book about sexuality my partner was reading said they have large external clitoris coming out of their butt.
I can bet you all my wealth that it would be used by Republicans to say I’m into bestiality and a sexual deviant.
The result of this is that the only people who can get into office are literally perfect or they’re very good at hiding their activities. You leave no room for normal people with varying levels of flaws and foibles and ‘weird’ interests to participate.
When you’re going to be given governmental powers beyond a normal citizen’s, it’s everyone’s business what sort of person you really are.
A browser history is not every piece of a personal life.
I am sorry, but it sounds like you have a good reason to be opposed to this.
We rarely disagree, but on this one, I think you’re way off.
That’s okay, according to @ASeriesOfPoorChoices, it’s because I am “going insane.” Gotta love an ableist. (I actually have mental illness, so I always love people who use it as a weapon.)
Dude, I normally agree with you, but not on this. You’re trying to set up a purity test for office. You might not use it that way, but the Repuglicans will.
Also do you really want to see your daughter’s entire browser history because you raised her well, and she decides to become a civil servant? Or worse, have it plastered all over the news? Think hard on that one.
FS is a weird one. Did you know he didn’t know that online coupons existed? like, at all? It started in a topic about Domino’s pizza (yes, he never knew Domino’s Pizza had coupons), and turns out it expanded to anything online, as he listed a bunch of websites that he was certain, just like Domino’s, didn’t have coupons. I’m not discrediting everything about him, but between this “privacy shouldn’t exist” stance and “everyone else is at fault for me never knowing that coupons existed on the internet”, I’m starting to wonder.
If she did something nefarious that the public should know about? Absolutely I do. I’m not why you think I would consider family a special case and I’m sorry you think that I’m that sort of hypocrite because I sure have never indicated I am.
(Also, I don’t know why people insist on telling me they normally agree with me when they disagree with me, but it happens all the time.)
Nah dude, I wasn’t calling you a hypocrite. I was trying to reframe it so that you could see how whatever her sexuality is would be weaponized against her. It’s a bad idea, for people that "have nothing to hide.
Would you want the world to know all the porn you ever looked at? Cause I wouldn’t, and from what I can tell, I’m into some pretty tame shit.
I wouldn’t run for office. And if you’re worried about that sort of thing and don’t want people to know about it, maybe you shouldn’t either. Because if they learn, you’ll be in a world of shit of your own making when you could have avoided it.
So let’s push normal people out of public office, and make sure to only have sociopaths who have no shame?
For example, I looked up a spider monkey’s vagina because a book about sexuality my partner was reading said they have large external clitoris coming out of their butt.
I can bet you all my wealth that it would be used by Republicans to say I’m into bestiality and a sexual deviant.
Why would someone vote for a sociopath with no shame if they saw that from their browser history?
Hello? Trump?
We haven’t seen Trump’s browser history, so that’s not a good argument to counter what I said, is it?
The result of this is that the only people who can get into office are literally perfect or they’re very good at hiding their activities. You leave no room for normal people with varying levels of flaws and foibles and ‘weird’ interests to participate.
Why would only perfect people have things in their browser history that wouldn’t turn people away from voting for them?