There are a few ideas so basically evil that just holding them, regardless of deeds, renders the speaker forfeit of the basic "shared humanity" level of comradery that I share with the vast majority of other people. This may be one of the few examples I've come across that fit that description while not falling under the normal umbrella categories of bigotry or unjustified calls for violence.

This proposal isn't just evil, it's evil in a remarkably novel way. I'm disgusted in ways normally reserved for stumbling upon a group of neonazis chatting amongst themselves.

I'm still reeling that someone had the gall to write a sentence like this and call it "good civics." It's a love letter to totalitarianism.

> Then, fourth and finally (drum roll, please!), they'll need to allow courts to jail the accused until: (a) the communication has been decrypted by someone; (b) the maximum penalty for the charged crime has been exceeded; or (c) the court decides to release the accused.