- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: New Orleans native named top leader at ICE, deepening Louisiana's ties to the agency
Posted on 1/23/26 at 4:05 pm to 4cubbies
Posted on 1/23/26 at 4:05 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
We are entitled to our opinions.
I agree that this is an opinion of yours.
quote:
I'm discussing government laws. You keep bringing up other laws. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, my commentary pertains the laws written and enforced by the government.
Ah but the overlap is great.
There are civil laws that mirror Divine and natural laws.
Murder, Rape, Theft, Assault, these are all mirrored across.
You cannot attack civil laws in a broad way without attacking their mirror.
quote:
I have children.
And wealth.
quote:
Your opinion. Not a fact.
I mean you can measure our system in historical context, against the claims of Aquinas, or Aristotle.
It's not an opinion, it's a statement with supporting information, as I am measuring it against both the statistical rate
The
quote:
National Registry of Exonerations has documented over 3,175 exonerations in the U.S. since 1989
Out of around 35 million convictions.
Per your own words
quote:
The American system explicitly assumes this. Juries, adversarial procedure, appellate review, and separation of powers exist precisely because neutrality cannot be guaranteed.
Many levels of review and rights to prevent injustice.
quote:
Oh? I work within system and am capable of drawing my own conclusions based on what I observe with my own eyes.
Having seen what you say, you really accept things that reinforce your opinions, you speak of critiquing everything, but you treat self justifications as fact, treat anecdotes as data.
Again you have always refused to share these anecdotes, is it because you know deep down how weak they are?
Unfortunately true believers see themselves as the protagonist of their own story, I believe it therefore it must be true, I don't believe it there for if I criticize it long enough it will fall apart.
quote:
I don't have a problem with you believing everyone is treated fairly and equally in this country. You are free to deny the abundance of evidence proving otherwise.
I don't think you need to have everyone always be treated fairly (A term you fail to define) to have a just system.
I've shown how your claims of "Dignity" are far outside anything the Bible, Historical Christianity, and Aquinas would consider as orthodox.
People should question their own views and the views that seem most sweet to them much more than they question anything else.
1
Posted on 1/23/26 at 4:19 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Your opinion. Not a fact.
Like your incorrect OPINION that goes against the FACTS regarding Trayvon martin and Sandra bland?
Bueller?
Bueller?
Bueller?
Posted on 1/23/26 at 4:38 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
My response was also hones
No, it wasn't.
You assumed someone thought a certain way, then assigned it to them.
quote:
You just don't like it.
Correct. It is a shitty approach.
"Yeah, you may not have said this, but I just KNOW you are thinking it". Classic progressive trope.
quote:
Disingenuous is pretending you would suddenly start treating random strangers like humans if they were standing in a different country.
I never once stated how I felt, yet you are doing it again.
A full two paragraphs of assigning things to me and others that never thought or felt any of those things.
I am close acquaintances with not one, not two, but three people who have come from three different countries and became citizens. I have their citizenship ceremony pictures on my phone. One from Canada, one from Nigeria, and one from China.
I support everything these people did. They came here, did everything the right way, and are wonderful, hard working additions to the country.
Now, go ahead and tell me I'm lying, or that I really feel something else. It is literally all you have when pushing your narratives. You do not debate anything in good faith.
Posted on 1/23/26 at 7:59 pm to Narax
quote:I care more about being able to raise my kids than material wealth.
And wealth.
quote:No, I’m pushing back on your reliance on vague, undisclosed anecdotes. If you’re claiming I’m reasoning from personal stories, point to one.
but you treat self justifications as fact, treat anecdotes as data.]
Again you have always refused to share these anecdotes, is it because you know deep down how weak they are?
quote:
Unfortunately true believers see themselves as the protagonist of their own story, I believe it therefore it must be true, I don't believe it there for if I criticize it long enough it will fall apart.
This feels like projection more than analysis. I’m not claiming moral heroism, victimhood, or special insight. I’m making structural arguments about law, power, and enforcement. Reducing that to “main character syndrome” is a way to avoid engaging while being incredibly condescending.
quote:
I've shown how your claims of "Dignity" are far outside anything the Bible, Historical Christianity,
No, you selectively cited Scripture to support a conclusion you’d already reached, and you did so in a discussion about civil law, not theology. I didn’t reciprocate because proof-texting doesn’t resolve questions about modern governance in this country.
quote:Yes. Including yourself.
People should question their own views and the views that seem most sweet to them much more than they question anything else.
You keep shifting from argument to attribution of motive. I’m discussing systems. You’re discussing my psychology.
Posted on 1/23/26 at 8:09 pm to SludgeFactory
quote:
You assumed someone thought a certain way, then assigned it to them.
Referring to a person as “an illegal” is dehumanizing. Illegal is an adjective, not a noun. Are you claiming that by asking what it would take to humanize “illegals,” I was incorrectly assigning dehumanization?
quote:I made an inference based on your enthusiastic disapproval of my position.
I never once stated how I felt, yet you are doing it again.
quote:
I am close acquaintances with not one, not two, but three people who have come from three different countries and became citizens. I have their citizenship ceremony pictures on my phone. One from Canada, one from Nigeria, and one from China.
I support everything these people did. They came here, did everything the right way, and are wonderful, hard working additions to the country.
Now, go ahead and tell me I'm lying, or that I really feel something else. It is literally all you have when pushing your narratives. You do not debate anything in good faith.
Respectfully, your personal relationships aren’t relevant to this discussion. You inserted yourself into the discussion on page 6 or 7 to express your dislike for me and to express your disapproval of people engaging with me. And to tell people you know immigrants.
This post was edited on 1/23/26 at 8:15 pm
Posted on 1/23/26 at 8:12 pm to 4cubbies
Dehumanizing!!!!!
Posted on 1/23/26 at 8:15 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Referring to a person as “an illegal” is dehumanizing.
No, it is a actual fact. If you are in the the country without proper authorization it is a fact that you are illegal.
Posted on 1/23/26 at 8:28 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
What would it take to humanize “illegals” for you?
Just because someone is a criminal doesn't mean they aren't human. They just need to pay the price.
Posted on 1/23/26 at 8:35 pm to Ponchy Tiger
quote:
No, it is a actual fact. If you are in the the country without proper authorization it is a fact that you are illegal.
That’s not how the English language works. Someone who breaks the law, broke the law. The person doesn’t transform into an adjective as a result.
“Illegal” is an adjective that modifies actions or status, not a noun that redefines a person’s essence. We say “illegal search,” “illegal contract,” “illegal vote” because the act violates the law. We don’t normally collapse the entire person into the violation unless we’re trying to dehumanize or shorthand blame.
Posted on 1/23/26 at 8:59 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
I care more about being able to raise my kids than material wealth.
Quite the sidestep.
Those with wealth pretend its not important to them, its a privilege they have.
Only those with no wealth can credibly scale the importance of wealth to them.
quote:
No, I’m pushing back on your reliance on vague, undisclosed anecdotes. If you’re claiming I’m reasoning from personal stories, point to one.
... what? You must seriously be joking, I spent walls of text quoting the Bible, statistical evidence, Scholasticism, 19th century Popes...
And now we pretend that I am the one who somehow thinks a guy who killed his own child was a victim and doesnt deserve to die for violating divine, natural and civil law.
That guy was evil pure unadulterated evil. But you can't see it.
quote:
I’m making structural arguments about law, power, and enforcement
No, you are repeating a weak eco chamber, you have done none of the work to establish even the foundation of an argument.
quote:
Reducing that to “main character syndrome” is a way to avoid engaging while being incredibly condescending.
I've read your many posts, I don't say it lightly and even now you show it.
You chain of logic goes... well this sounds negative, so it can't be true, therefore it must be condescending.
Look its who you actually show to others. If you dont want critical feedback this is not a great place to be.
I think you should know how you come across, without being actually rude.
quote:
No, you selectively cited Scripture to support a conclusion you’d already reached, and you did so in a discussion about civil law, not theology. I didn’t reciprocate because proof-texting doesn’t resolve questions about modern governance in this country.
Sigh...
You know I've read the entire Bible a number of times I've memorized quite a bit of it.
Do you remember when I was referencing statistics and you then told me I should read the book The Color of Money... which I had read cover to cover and was actually referring to in the previous post?
You cant call someone's references selective in reaction when you yourself are unable to come up with a response.
Thats so lazy.
To note, its also an ugly form of lazy to insist modern governance can be understood without any background... while making claims that others are proof texting...
quote:
Yes. Including yourself.
Always all the time.
quote:
You keep shifting from argument to attribution of motive. I’m discussing systems. You’re discussing my psychology.
You have provided nothing in the way of definition of anything you have said, you made false claims about dignity and a medieval philosopher, again having refused to read any of his other text that are completely counter your arguments.
You've doged and moved your point around a number of times.
I would like to hear a good argument against our judicial system, but you have done nothing of the sort.
I'd really like to know what ivory tower people accept your artificial view of the world where child killers and lesbians have dignity, but those who want a nation of equal laws are harming human dignity.
Like I said, you obviously have unearned wealth from your husband or family to say such things.
Posted on 1/23/26 at 9:03 pm to 4cubbies
Illegal modifies!
4dummies
Illegal immigrants are illegal.
4dummies
Illegal immigrants are illegal.
Posted on 1/23/26 at 9:49 pm to Narax
quote:
And now we pretend that I am the one who somehow thinks a guy who killed his own child was a victim and doesnt deserve to die for violating divine, natural and civil law.
Nope. You’re attributing positions to me that I have not taken and arguments I have not made.
I never argued that a man who killed his own child is a “victim,” nor that he shouldn’t face the full weight of divine, natural, or civil law.
quote:I have given concrete examples of privilege and bias in the justice system, examples you acknowledged. Pointing out that bias exists in enforcement and outcomes is not an attack on the existence of law, nor is it an argument against punishment. It’s an argument about fallible human administration of law, which even the framers assumed.
No, you are repeating a weak eco chamber, you have done none of the work to establish even the foundation of an argument.
quote:
f you dont want critical feedback this is not a great place to be.
Likewise. I’m fine with disagreement. What I’m not engaging with is repeated mind-reading, psychoanalysis, or imputations of motive.
quote:
I think you should know how you come across, without being actually rude.
I come across differently to different people. I understand you think my tone reads as dismissive. That isn’t my intent.
quote:
Do you remember when I was referencing statistics and you then told me I should read the book The Color of Money... which I had read cover to cover and was actually referring to in the previous post?
No. I’ve never read The Color of Money. You must mean The Color of the Law.
quote:
You cant call someone's references selective in reaction when you yourself are unable to come up with a response.
Thats so lazy.
I don’t doubt you’ve read the Bible a number of times. My claims are about the American justice system, not theology. I attempted to engage in your theological arguments but it didn’t feel cohesive in this thread.
quote:
To note, its also an ugly form of lazy to insist modern governance can be understood without any background... while making claims that others are proof texting...
One certainly can critique bias in modern American governance without analyzing biblical forms of justice.
quote:
You've doged and moved your point around a number of times.
You’re right about one thing: I should not have followed the theological pivot as far as I did. My claim is narrower and hasn’t changed. There is bias at every layer of the American justice system because humans, with unequal power and resources, operate it. That claim does not require rejecting law, theology, or moral standards.
quote:Sure I have. Even the framers knew bias was inevitable. I’ve even provided examples of bias.
I would like to hear a good argument against our judicial system, but you have done nothing of the sort.
quote:Everyone possesses human dignity because we were each made in the image and likeness of God. Wanting a nation of equal laws doesn’t harm dignity. Allowing privilege and bias to prevent a nation of equal laws does. Not sure what purpose referencing “ivory tower people” serves…
I'd really like to know what ivory tower people accept your artificial view of the world where child killers and lesbians have dignity, but those who want a nation of equal laws are harming human dignity
quote:
Like I said, you obviously have unearned wealth from your husband or family to say such things.
The “ivory tower” line and the speculation about my husband’s or family’s wealth are especially telling. Those are not arguments. I’m not responding to them because there’s nothing there to respond to.
I don’t understand how people have such wild perceptions of the kind of person I am. I’m just a regular person. I’m friendly and likable and have a good sense of humor IRL. I have never considered myself particularly ANYTHING. I don’t think I’m a genuis or saint or supermodel or anything else remarkable. My husband says my smile is what stands out most about me. The people I serve at work say I’m a good listener and I care about them. To constantly be told I’m some smug, arrogant out-of-touch a-hole here just doesn’t align with my reality.
This post was edited on 1/23/26 at 10:00 pm
Posted on 1/24/26 at 7:34 am to 4cubbies
quote:
That’s not how the English language works. Someone who breaks the law, broke the law. The person doesn’t transform into an adjective as a result.
“Illegal” is an adjective that modifies actions or status, not a noun that redefines a person’s essence. We say “illegal search,” “illegal contract,” “illegal vote” because the act violates the law. We don’t normally collapse the entire person into the violation unless we’re trying to dehumanize or shorthand blame.
Does Criminal work better for you?
Posted on 1/24/26 at 7:37 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Respectfully, your personal relationships aren’t relevant to this discussion.
Of course. I even stated above you would do exactly this, then you did.
quote:
You inserted yourself into the discussion on page 6 or 7 to express your dislike for me
Nope. Wrong again.
I expressed my dislike for the way you approach a "debate". If you view that as an attack on you personally, then that's you. I have even told other posters here in the past to quit attacking your looks, on more than one occasion.
quote:
And to tell people you know immigrants
Ah yes, the classic progressive MO strikes again.
Funny thing is, my friend from China refers to you and yours as "Baizou", for these very reasons.
Twisting words, changing definitions, and assigning thoughts to your domestic enemy is literally all you have.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 7:41 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Nope. You’re attributing positions to me that I have not taken and arguments I have not made.
Gets their own medicine, then writes a novel....literally four posts down from doing the exact same thing to me.
LOLOLOL
Yeah, I have successfully stooped to your level now.
Well, I tried. Won't happen again. Lesson learned. Keep doing what you are doing. It is clear its just for attention and not actual conversation. I'll let the rest of the board go along with it and won't try again.
Wish you nothing but the best.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 7:44 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Referring to a person as “an illegal” is dehumanizing.
Who gives a frick? You don’t want to be called an illegal, don’t come here illegally. Just more emotional drivel.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 7:45 am to 4cubbies
quote:
What would it take to humanize “illegals” for you?
Following the laws of the country they are guests in would be a good start.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 8:22 am to SludgeFactory
quote:
. It is clear its just for attention and not actual conversation.
What makes this clear? How do you identify which on-topic discussions are “just for attention” and which on-topic discussions are actual conversations?
What is clear is that you’re just baiting a reaction from me and here I am giving you one. I should know better.
Posted on 1/24/26 at 8:25 am to 4cubbies
How is calling someone who is here illegally an illegal dehumanizing 
That would be the same label anywhere in the world
That would be the same label anywhere in the world
Posted on 1/24/26 at 8:44 am to 4cubbies
quote:He/She is an "illegal" makes illegal a noun.
“Illegal” is an adjective that modifies actions or statu
Page 8 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News