263
Catherine, Princess of Wales, Has Cancer
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
263 points (100.0% liked)
News
23301 readers
2953 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Sorry... you know somehow that they won't do this and so because of that, you wish cancer on them?
And even if they don't do that... what exactly would they have done in their lives that would justify a horrible, slow, agonizing death?
We don't do that to multiple-murderers in most countries.
Not worth arguing with them honestly. Either a troll or some serious mental issues.
I said when they grown up.
And I agree, the guillotine is faster and more humane.
Again- what would they do to deserve a guillotine? They would not be absolute monarchs. The power invested in the British crown is negligible.
So what in specific would they do to be worthy of execution or cancer besides be part of an archaic system with no power attached to it?
It's like you don't even understand what the point of the French Revolution was.
They literally amend laws on a whim and dictate foreign policy. I wouldn't call that negligible, no.
You keep saying the crown has no power, this is patently false.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vetted-more-than-1000-laws-via-queens-consent
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2022/05/27/queen-ultimate-example-soft-power/
https://newrepublic.com/article/172442/charles-coronation-power-british-monarchy
Not to mention that symbolism matters.
Did you actually read that second article? If so, can you tell me why what happened in Ghana was a bad thing?
Does something bad have to happen to acknowledge influence?
I would think that if you were arguing for why every single descendant of Queen Victoria and their spouses deserve a horrible agonizing death, you would use examples that didn't show them doing things that were a net benefit.
I’m not gonna sit here and defend the tankies in hexbear but I find sh.itjust works and kbin to have just as many shitty extremists like that piece of shit with no empathy. They never get called out like the others but I have blocked far more accounts from those two feds.
I'll pile on the confirmation bias for sh.itjust.works being full of either awful or idiotic users. Not all of them and maybe not even most of them but enough of them that it's left a very noticable impression.
There’s certainly a chance that it’s just the landing spot for hexbear alts but still, it’s a problem
Well I did give you two more articles to read that clearly demonstrate it but you simply chose to ignore them. Plus whether or not it benefits them directly is besides the point.
It's up to y'all to prove that these leeches are a net positive to society at large.
Nevermind the strawman that I want them to have agonizing death. I clearly stated that the guillotine would be preferable. Fast and efficient.
You can go now, it's already asking a lot to interact with bootlickers, but I won't tolerate people who act in bad faith. Bye! 👋
I see, so you don't think her going to Ghana benefited Britain, which is what I asked you about. Interesting that you claim that I'm acting in bad faith after saying that...
Again you are putting words in my mouth. And refuse to address the points that don't back up your point of view. All while moving the goal post of the original point.
Y'all do understand what eat the rich means, right?
Psssssht psssssht. Can you hear that? It's my can of SycophantBeGone.
I thought they meant it when they said eat the rich. They were just memeing?
It would appear so. I'm not surprised tbh, but still disappointed.
I see, so now you've moved beyond hoping descendants of Queen Victoria and the people they marry get cancer and now hope that anyone above a certain income level gets cancer.
Which is weird, because just a few posts up you said you wouldn't want her kids to get cancer if they renounced the monarchy... even though they would still be rich.
And I'm the one arguing in bad faith?
Also, you said you were going to stop talking to me and you're still talking to me.