fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3808 ]

[ SECRET POST #3808 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3808 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

[http://sarahcandersen.com/post/96540470653]

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 19 secrets from Secret Submission Post #545.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Sixty cents? Sure.

It's boggling to suggest that you or anyone else is entitled to tell a person what they can and can't eat because they're poor.

Jayzus, how fucking much of an asshole do you have to be to think you get to do that?

Um, no one is saying what poor people are and aren't allowed to eat? The argument is what government assistance such as food stamps should be used on. I love the righteous outrage and trying to twist this into an argument it isn't, though. You already can't use food stamps to buy alcohol, guess what, I'm cool with that, too, though I imagine you've already signed the petition to protest that ~judgment~ as well.

Uh, yes they are. I love *your* righteous outrage about poor people getting to choose what they spend their food money on.

Alcohol isn't food, so that is moot. Dear gods, you're a one-note bugger. I saw this same argument up above, and it was neatly put to rest by the other commentor. Basically - your argument is not only gross and ridiculous, but 100 percent lacking in empathy. I don't give a fuck what anybody buys with their SNAP or food stamps or whatever assistance they get. Have zero fucks to give.

Please go argue with somebody else now, i am so past done with your 'point of view', which i've heard from sad-sack right-wing asshats for years.

LOL what argument was "put to bed"? And while I'm not AYRT, I do share their view, and I'm far, far from rightwing. Stop acting like you speak for the entire left.

Oh, goody, two asshats who like to police the poor. You all go on and have fun talking about that, I'm done. Philstar 22 said everything that needed to be said, up above, and your very tired, right-wing bullshite 'argument' just gets more tired with every iteration.

Buh-bye!

It's threads like this that make me think the difference between the two sides really comes down to one thing: empathy. The right wingers have none.

They really don't. It's mind-boggling.

It is. When you think about it, I think pretty much any issue comes down to this (marriage equality/LGBT: they don't think about how THEY would feel if they were unable to marry the person they love or be with them in the hospital when they were sick; police brutality of minorites: they don't think about what it would be like if their teenage kid was shot for no fucking reason other than walking down the street and how completely fucking OUTRAGEOUS that is; immigration: they don't try to put themselves into the place of someone trying to get out of an incredibly dangeous situation into one where they don't have to constantly be in fear for their lives and that of their family, etc. etc.). If someone's life experience is outside of their own, that person obviously did something to deserve whatever bad circumstances they must be in, and fuck helping them or trying to at least see where they're coming from. I don't get people who don't at least TRY to be a decent person.

The problem with this sort of thing is that, if you're a reasonably intelligent person, you can justify an extremely wide range of political positions in terms of empathy

ALL OF THIS. Anon up there keeps going on and on about 'not right wing!! good person!!' but you know what? Not when you're trying to shame someone for being poor, and police their food and eating like they were a poor relation living on your sufferance.

ONce again, not right-wing at all. But I see your head is so firmly entrenched up your own ass that you can't comprehend a world where a good person might not see everything just like you. Talk about "gross."

A good person doesn't turn the choices people make for food (with money legally and lawfully given to them, used in a legal and lawful way) into a moralizing, shaming crusade. Sorry. You're not a good person.

Who said anything about shaming? Because yes, people CAN buy terrible food with their food stamps. That's the law. But laws? Laws can change. And the argument Other Anon and I are making is that the law should be different in order to promote healthier lifestyles.

It's another thing to dehumanize and alienate the poor in a society that's already extraordinarily devoted to dehumanizing them.

Good people don't try to shame poor people for being poor.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3808 ]

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions

Re: unpopular opinions