@ErinMink In your words: She is against: "I hate it here. America is embarrassing. Only we can riot & loot. Defund the police. Just do what the government tells you & donโt ask questions."
"only we can riot & loot" is a reference to the Black Lives Matter protests. She's being sarcastic. She is discrediting the BLM movement by equating it to "riot & looting". That's a strike.
In your words: Nothing hateful about questioning the laws that were made prior to the election by NON-lawmakers but still they were able to make UNCONSTITUTIONAL rules regarding voting.
This is disinformation. There's nothing unconstitutional about the way the 2020 election was conducted. When you make a claim that deviates from what is known to be true, the onus is on you to support those claims. What's your proof that the 2020 election was UNCONSTITUTIONAL? The proof that the elections were constitutional and legal is that all the courts in which the election results were challenged were overturned. Prove that it was UNCONSTITUTIONAL -- and no, "because Rudy Giuliani said so" is not proof. Find me an unbiased third party who can point out why it was UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
In your words: All Americans are allowed to question that crap and on those grounds alone, cheating happened.
Yes, you can question whatever you want. Free speech has its limits though. You can't use free speech to threaten to kill people, especially elected officials. You also can't spread blatant lies, and use those lies to whip people up into a frenzy to try and get them to overthrow the government. I can't think of any government where insurrection is legal. Trump has questioned the election, and local election officials and the courts of proved his claims were baseless. What would you do if someone owed you money, and then they "questioned" whether they actually owed you money? What if you took them to court and the judge upheld that you were owed the money -- would you still allow the debtor to "question" whether you were owed money? If the debtor started saying the court was rigged against him and the terms of the contract were violated, would it be ok to not pay the debt because the debtor made baseless claims?
In your words: Whats hateful is how nasty the left is to anyone that stands up for conservative views.
When you have a group of white supremacists gathering in Charlottesville and running over protestors, and the President of the United States is saying there were "fine people on both sides" -- that is disgusting. "Fine people" don't run around with tiki torches thinking that they're better than other people because of the color of their skin. Anyone who is ok being lumped in with a group of white supremacists is also not a "fine person".
In your words: And overthrowing the government? Really? Our government has been selling us out to China, big time universities get billions in donations from the Saudis.
I will agree with you there -- our government has done us a disservice in our interactions with both these countries. It's absolutely disgusting that the Trump administration allowed MBS to kill Khashoggi in Istanbul and not one word was said about it. We also would have been better served if our energies had focused on Saudi Arabia after 9/11 instead of Iraq.
Your words: America is the land of the free--free religion, right to bear arms, and we get to vote for whoever.
Likewise, Sephora gets to decide who they want to be associated it, and your girl Ensing is not it. Don't forget, freedom works both ways. You're free to be a jerk, and I'm free to ignore you.
Your words: What Sephora did was discrimination.
You're conflating discrimination in the general sense and discrimination in the legal sense here. Everyone has a right to be discriminating. In the legal sense, discrimination only applies to protected classes. Here's an excerpt from Findlaw.com: In plain English, to "discriminate" means to distinguish, single out, or make a distinction. In everyday life, when faced with more than one option, we discriminate in arriving at almost every decision we make. But in the context of civil rights law, unlawful discrimination refers to unfair or unequal treatment of an individual (or group) based on certain characteristics, including: age, disability, ethnicity, gender, marital status, national origin, race, religion, and sexual orientation.
I hope this clears things up for you. God bless.