VladtheDestroyer
Well-known member
I am a Christian, Anna, if I was feeling any of these things I would either pray, study the Bible or go play with my wife.
Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
I am a Christian, Anna, if I was feeling any of these things I would either pray, study the Bible or go play with my wife.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
She's projecting
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I suggest you do a lot more of those things, all of which are better than making childish comments about serious subjects.
No, I did not use ChatGPT. I did use a tool to help organize and refine my thoughts, similar to how people use any tool for clarity. The data, history, and reasoning are mine.
Accusing someone of using ChatGPT instead of engaging the arguments is a weak dodge. Would you please address the arguments I made, instead?
Do you dispute the assimilation patterns for Mexican-Americans across generations (language yes, but persistent gaps in education, income, intermarriage, and fiscal net contribution)? Or the relevance of group average cognitive ability to those outcomes in large-scale low-skilled immigration? Or that birthright citizenship creates strong incentives for chain migration and demographic shifts?
Did you hopefully understand why this decision by the supreme court is actually detrimental to our society? Maybe even just a little?
Or are you too blinded by your commitment to leftist ideology?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I didn't accuse, I asked, so let's keep this accurate.
What tool did you use to help organize your thoughts? What is it called?
I'm asking because I won't engage in a discussion with anyone, anywhere, who uses AI of any kind to build their argument. AI erodes critical thinking, reinforces user bias, and makes stuff up when it doesn't know the answer, so if people don't want to use their own words, and build their own argument, I'm not interested. That's it. It's not a copout, and it's not personal. I use that litmus here and on a couple other forums I belong to.
It's ludicrous you'd say I was making an accusation "instead of engaging the arguments," you know very well that for the most part, all I get from you guys is laughing emojis or "that's gay." Sure seems like you're using Alinsky on me, expecting me to jump through hoops that none of you will. That's an old story though, Jefferson agreed with me that rightists found Alinsky useful.
Then you refer to me being blinded (ad hom there), once again making the argument personal.
I'll put the question back to you: Do you hopefully understand why this decision by the supreme court is actually constitutionally sound? Maybe even just a little?
Last edited:
VladtheDestroyer
Well-known member
Gay.
