• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Do All Republican Candidates Favor Insurrection?

Colt

Well-Known Member
Except that nobody has condoned or tried to justify the violence and vandalism, nor were the protests against police misconduct an attempt to defy democracy.
I disagree, many people justified BLM violence! Corporations lined up to fund the “shakedown” con artist who made millions!
 

Laniakea

Not of this world
I disagree, many people justified BLM violence! Corporations lined up to fund the “shakedown” con artist who made millions!
And those who instigated it all are living in multiple mansions instead of prison.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Edited--therefore not credible.

Sorry, but you can't wish away Trump's abject stupidity.
And of course, a whataboutism.
It's not whataboutism when you're comparing mental cognition.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Would you please, like, come up with the legal definition of "insurrection" that we're supposed to be clinging to here?

I posted upthread that there seemed to be a great deal of emphasis and meaning placed on the word "insurrection," although ultimately, it would be up to the courts to make a ruling on this.

Strictly speaking the dictionary definition leaves a lot open for interpretation:


an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government

Using this definition, it doesn't even require that it be violent to fall within these parameters. An act of resisting arrest or fleeing a law enforcement officer can be considered an act of defiance against civil authority.

Of course, there are insurrections, and then there are insurrections. The Civil War was an insurrection. What happened on January 6th didn't even come close to that, regardless of what anyone chooses to call it.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Edited--therefore not credible.
And of course, a whataboutism.
LMAO! You just admitted that your video was completely worthless. It was heavily edited. In those videos the idiocy of Trump was left almost whole. They let him ramble on and on making sure that people knew, "Yes, Trump really believes that ****." Your source had to pick out seconds at a time instead of minutes at a time.
:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
 

Laniakea

Not of this world
This has been explained to you many times. "Insurrection" is not a criminal term. You will not find a legal definition for it. It is a pity that you can't understand the Constitution since it does not use legal terms.
Then continuing to use a non-criminal term to describe a "crime" is a losing argument, and you have lost.
 

Laniakea

Not of this world
LMAO! You just admitted that your video was completely worthless. It was heavily edited. In those videos the idiocy of Trump was left almost whole. They let him ramble on and on making sure that people knew, "Yes, Trump really believes that ****." Your source had to pick out seconds at a time instead of minutes at a time.
:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
I'll tolerate your desire to believe as you wish.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Then continuing to use a non-criminal term to describe a "crime" is a losing argument, and you have lost.
Wrong again. Even you know that drunk driving is wrong (I hope). It is illegal. But drunk driving is not a criminal term. The same applies to the insurrection.
How many times has this been explained to you in one form or another?
 
Top