Yes, but making the world a less cruel place requires strength—strength of purpose, strength of character, and intellectual strength to have hard conversations about hard realities. We don’t reduce cruelty by ignoring the harm done by those who break the law. The people you defend are not victims—they are the ones making life harder for others, whether it’s overwhelming social services, committing crimes, or undercutting legal immigrants who followed the rules.

We don’t fight cruelty by sanitizing language or pretending reality isn’t what it is. We fight it by acknowledging hard truths and having the courage to address them honestly, not emotionally.

See: Bikeshedding, also known as Parkinson's law of triviality, describes our tendency to devote a disproportionate amount of our time to menial and trivial matters.

Illegals are your bikeshed.True moral and intellectual courage is needed on a different hill rn.

Oh, so now it’s “bikeshedding” when we talk about the rule of law, national sovereignty, and the impact of illegal immigration on American citizens? You’re right, those sound like totally menial and trivial things…

Dismissing an argument as “trivial” instead of refuting it is just a lazy way to avoid addressing uncomfortable realities. If this issue is so unimportant, why are you so bothered by it?

And what exactly is this “different hill” where true moral and intellectual courage is needed? You didn’t even say. Just throwing out vague moral superiority without naming a real issue is nothing but posturing.

If you actually have an argument, please make it. Otherwise, pretending hard conversations aren’t worth having is just an excuse to avoid them.

Social services are designed to serve people. If it is being overwhelmed, that's because it's been underfunded.