jdck1326

My point is that our personal views on his positions and character are irrelevant. You seem to be discussing a different point.

How bad you or I think he is is irrelevant. If the people's decision is overturned when the elite do not like it then the country isn't any kind of democracy.

source?

>your patronizing comment comes across massively condescending

Not the case if you give the comment a charitable reading.

It could also be a moderation thing. If the people working on the website mostly just speak English, then it will be much easier for them to moderate an English-only website.

>A hoax is a falsehood deliberately fabricated to masquerade as the truth

Perse probably didn't know it was a hoax.

I'm not sure the person was speaking about the law or current rules.

One flaw in your reasoning is that often times people are willing to pay for things which are bad. For example, the Holocaust was bad (a lot of good people died), but people were willing to pay for help in carrying out the Holocaust. Therefore, it doesn't follow from the fact that people are willing to pay for a thing (the Holocaust), that that thing is a morally correct thing to do (the Holocaust was bad). That is to say, just because someone values something (people valued the Holocaust), doesn't mean that it is a moral thing to do (the Holocaust was not a moral thing to do).

To see my point all you need to do is imagine either a bad person or an ignorant person having money. If you think either of those situations is plausible, then you can surely imagine such a person paying for something which has a bad effect on the world. For most ideas of morality, doing things which can reasonably be expected to have bad effects on the world is considered immoral (this is very loosely stated, but hopefully you can see my point).

>not a recipe for happiness

And certainly not a recipe for morality

And risk upsetting Israel?