I mean, of course they're not. But this is the way progressives practice "reality control", by speaking as if the only obvious truth of a thing is its diametric opposite.
shareYeah, that conversation bothered me (on both sides).
Daisy should have used different words and phrasing, but then again she is Jiyang's daughter, so I don't think she cared.
You're leaving out the important word at the end of the sentence, which was "Americans." The argument was being framed as "Inhuman Americans vs. 'Normal' Americans." But being an inhuman doesn't make them any less "normal" American. They are Americans. And your trying to conflate this into a liberal vs. conservative narrative only speaks to the rampant willful ignorance that has grown in American conservatism over recent years.
shareNadeer says "...normal Americans". Daisy says only "normal". Inasmuch as an individual passing through terigenises retains a Social Security number and whatnot, they remain as American as any other citizen. But "normal"? No. Not in this ficticious universe any more than for the assorted weirdos and scofflaws progressives seek to normalize by declaration in the real world which tv fiction is meant to reflect and comment on.
shareSo is Steve Rogers not a normal American? Bruce Banner?
shareYou're asking me whether a guy who turns into an invincible green monster is "normal"?
Within the context of the discussion, you know exactly what I'm asking. Stop feigning ignorance.
shareI know what context you're trying to force by focusing on the word "American", and I already answered it. Twice now. But it's not what Sen. Nadeer meant, unless you really believe that Nadeer would regard a Canadian with unpredictable, alien-infused super-powers as more or less normal than an American with unpredictable, alien-infused super-powers.
As I suggested, this is the same cynical bs progressives do when the try to bannish any consideration of immigration law, the purposes of borders and the definition of citizenship by screeching "No person is illegal!".
But "normal"? No. Not in this ficticious universe any more than for the assorted weirdos and scofflaws progressives seek to normalize by declaration in the real world
Gender identitarians, illegal immigrants, etc..
share[quote]nd your trying to conflate this into a liberal vs. conservative narrative only speaks to the rampant willful ignorance that has grown in American conservatism over recent years.[/quote
You tell 'em db. Although if OP does want to look at it that way, at least as a conservative he's assigned himself the proper role of "the bad guy".
For "bad guys" they at least managed to refrain from mass street violence when they lost elections in the past. The bad guys are the ones reenacting Krystalnacht because a free and fair election didn't go their way.
shareTrump basically had his own militia riled up before the election. Had it ended with Hillary winning (imagine without the popular vote!) there would have been ten times as much violence.
Plus, people aren't protesting because their candidate didn't win. They're protesting because a disgusting lowlife has been elected President and going by the amount of f-ups that Trump and his people have delivered since then, they clearly had every reason to do so.
Literally any other Republican candidate would not have sparked this kind of outrage; pretending otherwise is ridiculous.
"We're a team, Garrus. There's no Shepard without Vakarian."
Nah. As much as I'm certain you'd love to recede into an alternate reality in which your candidate won, we're all here in this reality in which progressives riot literally every time a presidential election doesn't go their way. We have history as our guide on this.
That the Democrat party and it's media spent the final weeks of the campaign blackmailing the public with dark fantasies about their opponents rioting only adds an element of comedic hypocrisy to the thing. What stands out as disgusting, however, is that neither Clinton nor former President Obama used their position of influence to quell the violence going on in their name, conducted by their supporters, which they and their media incited.
I was waiting for her to say "Inhumans are also Americans". Would of been a better comeback in my opinion.
shareYes. That would be a sensible statement.
shareNot all Inhumans are Americans. They can be of any nationality.
Also, as if being American would matter all that much. Actually a better reference than civil rights of Americans would be human rights. This would lead to the point of saying "Inhumans are also humans", which bears some absurdity. Anyhow an interesting topic to bring forward in the story.
Of course Daisy is wrong about Inhumans being "normal". Just as wrong as the underlying assumption that being normal should be the reason for enjoying basic rights.
Of course Daisy is wrong about Inhumans being "normal". Just as wrong as the underlying assumption that being normal should be the reason for enjoying basic rights.The show has tried to make or create a degree of empathy and sympathy for the self-identified Inhumans and it is really struggling.
I approve this message!share
I was waiting for her to say "Inhumans are also Americans".I was more curious as to daisy's response that, "More often than not Inhumans are left to fend for themselves, with few resources."
I can give you the one thing that even the great Galactus needs!share
I look at it this way. They are normal, until they decide to use their powers to cause harm. But, is that any different than a skilled computer programmer who uses his skills to do some hacking? Or someone who learned special fighting skills in the military and use that to hurt people.
Yes, some can't help themselves but neither can a lot of humans.
The Sokovia Accords bother me, so I'm not going to really side with the committee.
I look at it this way. They are normal, until they decide to use their powers to cause harm.Using their unearned powers for good or evil or personal gain has nothing to do with defining their normality.
But, is that any different than a skilled computer programmer who uses his skills to do some hacking?That again is more about defining or ascribing a judgement to their actions and not who they are.
Or someone who learned special fighting skills in the military and use that to hurt people.All normal humans created equally have the ability but maybe not the determination to learn Computer Programming and or Advanced fighting skills. How they use those acquired skills neither makes nor detracts from being "Normal" humans.
Yes, some can't help themselves but neither can a lot of humans.Inhumans based on Humans seem to share all of the same strengths and weaknesses purely because they all start from the same basic DNA (Nature) and thrive within the same basic collection of humanity (Nurture).
The Sokovia Accords bother me, so I'm not going to really side with the committee.That's a topic for another day.
I can give you the one thing that even the great Galactus needs!share
inhumans are humans, they just have something extra.
it would be like saying someone with a cold isn't human because they have something foreign in their body.
i mean who doesn't want super powers?
everyone is just jelly.