swim

… that is there question.

Oh yeah well im bigly better at gulf than you

What? What? Fat chance, jack

etc.

Lol bad take

Reference

But I’ve read they have since mitigated the traceability of their pizza eating through various means.

Yes, and I feel like the Republicans as you describe them would aptly be called “creepy.”

And I think “cringe” is often a feeling of second-hand embarrassment.

“Weird” and “strange” are more general and synonymous with “unusual” and “peculiar.”

None of that is in disagreement with your take, though

This is a christian server

Believe it or not, there have been well-reasoned, aptly articulated arguments against capitalism delivered by earnest, enlightened people (and members of every class), delivered chiefly out of compassion for their fellow man, for over 200 years.

Anti-capitalism sentiment is in no way a transient sensation. It’s clear from your comments you aren’t well-read on the subject, and I don’t mean that as an insult; with some even-keeled reading of relevant works rather than knee-jerk dismissal of all criticism of capitalism as people looking for something to “blame for their woes,” you will undoubtedly have a better grasp on the world and your own position in it.

This is it, folks

Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?

Prosecution, but yeah. Persecute this shithead

That’s the mistake you’ve been making that I pointed out: they were never challenging the fact that knowing employment law will protect your job when protesting. They were challenging a conflation of the law with company policy.

No one in this discussion thinks the Constitution will protect them from termination when the company has employment law on their side, they’re insisting against (what seemed to be your) assertions that acting against company policy was a matter of criminal law.

E: They said “It is […] legal to voice political opinions, even on company time, even on company platforms, and it is also legal for the company to fire the people doing so.” And you replied "That’s the misinformation that caused these people their jobs. Stop spreading it. You’re wrong, and dangerously misinforming others about US laws. You cannot voice political opinions at work if the company has a policy against the practice." They weren’t spreading misinformation, man. You, however, are using words like “you cannot” about company policy, like a bootlicker.

Trespassing is against the law, yep. Doesn’t look like anybody was disputing that or ignorant of anything you’re talking about. The person above was correctly making a needed distinction; “the law” has been conflated with “company policy.”

A small amount of education on the law as it relates to murder and homicide will disabuse you of this naiveté.

This is true, and a foundational distinction in law, which makes it unfortunate that so many folks think you’re being pedantic due to being confident in their knowledge base on subjects they aren’t educated in.

Your point is that VIIII was ever used in history? Happily conceded.

Fair

Didn’t realize homie was an antiquated clock. (Assumed the usage of Roman numerals, like in the references being made, in which case I don’t believe the clumsy VIIII only used on old clocks would really be valid.)

Uh, you mean “IX”?

There is a big difference between criminal law and civil (tort) law. “Suing” takes place in civil court and is not a matter of actions being criminal offenses, violations, or “illegal,” and tort cases have different burdens of proof.

You can sue someone for just about anything, hence the concept of “frivolous lawsuits.” That wouldn’t need have anything to do with a criminal offense, of which, no, “insult” is generally not.