Dude you’re reaching and misquoting what he actually said. He actually didn’t say that AT ALL and it was another commentator who made people think that: https://youtu.be/K9T2uRVv9xQ?si=4_gwqnzvvFXqDZ8E. He said that the civil rights movement was well intentioned at first, but it’s metamorphasized into a beast which holds more hatred
It really seems like you’re jumbling up the actual argument to fit your own narrative in order to make conservatives “look dumb”. Why even mention Hitler if you’re not referring to Nazis? They’re clearly saying that we’re sympathizing with someone who 100 years in the future will be looked at as someone as terrible as Hitler which isn’t true and it’s stupid to steer the argument away from the actual meaning of the post
we’re saying arguments like “it’s bad to wish harm on him, he had a family!” is a stupid argument because it can’t be applied holistically. the quoted post is making fun of y’all’s inability to understand that you can argue it’s bad to wish harm on him, but come up with a better argument than “he had a family” or “think about his kids.” come up with an argument that can be applied to every situation, even hitler.
Yeah you are reaching. It is bad to wish death on anybody. Period. That argument can be used for anyone, even Hitler. Like what is there to disagree about? It is devastating to families when a person dies, even if they’re “bad” by your standards. Again, you’re making the correlation of Charlie being like Hitler. That’s what you’re inferring in your argument otherwise Hitler wouldn’t have even been mentioned. Charlie isn’t near as wild as Hitler was so if you want to make this argument maybe
Harm isn’t even what we’re arguing here, it’s death. I’d wish harm upon Hitler but not death. And the thing is Charlie wasn’t committing mass genocide. I mean I could wish harm upon Hitler and say he deserves to be put in a gas chamber to face the consequences of his actions, but why did Charlie deserve death of all things? If you really wanted him to suffer, you’d get him arrested so he could live a miserable life in jail but there’s nothing to arrest him for. Death is punishment to the family
what about making an argument applicable to every situation do you not understand? nobody, and i do mean nobody, believes it’s bad to wish harm on someone in *EVERY* case. you’re not buddha. there is *some* situation where you would wish harm on someone. maybe it’s if they were robbing you. maybe it’s if they are trying to kill your child. figure out what your moral boundaries are and justify them with an argument that can apply to ALL situations