this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2024
408 points (94.5% liked)
United States | News & Politics
7145 readers
128 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The fact that the US federal government has the power to outlaw this but doesn't, that this specific execution was brought before the Supreme Court and they voted against blocking it 6–3, and the fact that the majority of US states (27) and the federal government have this on the books speak for the US now, yes.
Taken to an absurd extreme, let's imagine that the US federal government and 27 of its states explicitly had statutes on the books stating "you can legally rape puppies", and you stepping in and saying "Well that doesn't speak for the entire US! Stop trying to make it sound like everyone condones puppy rape just because Missouri allows it!" Would you say that then? Because I feel like any rational person would be asking "Why does the US allow this to happen?" If not, why would you say it here? The US is simply backwards in this regard.
Puppy rape? Is that supposed to be an argument?
Would you come to the US' defense in the same way that you are right now over state-sanctioned murder in the situation I outlined? It's a very simple yes/no question that you're tiptoeing around for seemingly no reason.
In saying that one state doesn't speak for the entire country, YES. That was said in my first comment, maybe you should reread it.
Damn, last I checked, 27 plus the federal government was more than 1. Maybe the federal government expressed as an integer actually comes out to negative 26 and makes your ridiculous defense make any sense.
I didn't mention numbers but you mentioned puppy rape. Stop drinking so early, it'll rot your liver.
I think you got lost on the way to /c/preschool where they teach you what numbers are.
My first comment said "Missouri speaks for the entire US now?" where exactly did I say one state? What hallucinogenic are you on right now?
That was said in your comment. Maybe you should reread it.
Why do I bother, you're too dumb to know what my first comment was.
Missouri is one state. Even if you listed multiple states your point is still shit.
Yes, it is, however, even a three-year-old who can read would see that I wrote Missouri not one state.
BTW Mr Anus, I neither care what you think of my point nor where you stick it.
A three year old couldn't read what you wrote but they could probably understand that there are 50 states and Missouri is ONE of them. You're arguing semantics because you got blasted for your stupid comments. Have a cookie.
They couldn't? Some of the kids that were in pre-school when I was could but I'm a stupid boomer so what do I know....
No, they might know simple words like "in" but they're not reading sentences.
Either way, people do judge the actions of countries based on single states, districts, whatever. If I was a black person looking to travel to America I may reconsider after reading about Marcellus. I definitely wouldn't go to missurah. Just like we all judge other countries based on the actions of their governments. The point is, another potentially innocent black person was murdered by the government. If the death penalty is for resolution for the victims and they're completely against it, and the evidence used to convict is flawed, why the fuck would you kill someone? Do you think this would have happened if Marcellus was white? They're telling us they're in charge and our lives do not matter and they'll kill us to prove that point. But I'm just an angry black dude I guess.