And the NRA has been all but disavowed by the gun community because of their willingness to "compromise" and the fact that they have operated as Wayne La Pierre's slush fund for 30 years.
The NRA has not been a part of any of the significant legal battles that have been clawing back gun rights since Bruen. Their primary value now is as a decoy for idiot leftists to mindlessly target for protests and political screeds while the real gun advocacy groups do their work in the background.
the NRA has been all but disavowed by the gun community
Tell that to my liberal Fudd neighbors who despite owning guns believe the NRA is an evil political activist group that only exists to do the bidding of Republicans and kill schoolchildren.
But you addressed that in the decoy part. So maybe we shouldn't tell them.
You cannot be "conservative" and believe women should have any say in politics. Once you understand this to be true, then you'll easily be able to figure out how "conservative" a political group involving only women is.
For the majority due to a higher collectivist bias, probably but there are some great conservative women around.
The biggest historical one would probably be Olga of Kiev, what's more conservative than raising your son to be a great leader and sticking by your husband with a 'till death do us part.....and if anyone is the cause of your death, I'm genociding their whole fucking society!'
Exceptions don't make the rule. Even though exceptional women do exist, we would be better off if we pretended these women didn't exist and treated all women as inferior to men rather than trying to figure out who the exceptional women are and are not.
Listen, if we find out there's another badass bitch like that living in this world right now, I'm giving the same rights as us guys, as I like having my reproductive organs intact and in working order.
Plus she'd be WAY more conservative than a lot of men (points to those in blue cities)
It seems a very similar parallel to "Based Black Man": within a proper (functional) environment they can hold even higher standards than the average man. But given improper incentives...well we see the effects today.
Me and Imp are both about as "anti-women" and "pro-men" as they come but yes, we seem to have very different conceptions of what the ideal to realize that is.
I would say I am very much the pinnacle of what a pure patriarchy would be while still trying to sustain and grow a civilization by incorporating women in said society, whereas Imp seems to be more focused on entirely removing men from having any relationship to women whatsoever regardless of the impacts this would have on society or its sustainability.
Imp seems to be more focused on entirely removing men from having any relationship to women whatsoever regardless of the impacts this would have on society or its sustainability.
He claims that is a tactic to pressure women into doing what we want. If you point out that it won't work because women would indeed let the species be destroyed to keep acting however the hell they want to act, he will simply say that proves he is right about women.
I'm stuck on the liars that are just cheaters. But, they believe they're monogomous because one part didn't know the relationship was open on the others side. You know those cheaters don't think they're poly. They are, they're just not very ethical to their non poly partner.
A walking std is a walking std no matter what they call themselves.
So how conservative are they truly, can they answer these yes/no questions:
Are you completely pro 2nd ammendment, no buts?
Death penalty for pedophiles found guilty beyond reasonable doubt?
Monogamous relationships
Replacing the US border with type of security on par with the Korean DMZ
Repealing all Abortion laws
Homeschooling
Removal of conscription or making it apply to both genders
If they say yes to all then they can keep the name and group, no to any and you fight to keep the men out on your own.
TBF background checks and waiting periods (all supported by the NRA) are "buts"
And the NRA has been all but disavowed by the gun community because of their willingness to "compromise" and the fact that they have operated as Wayne La Pierre's slush fund for 30 years.
The NRA has not been a part of any of the significant legal battles that have been clawing back gun rights since Bruen. Their primary value now is as a decoy for idiot leftists to mindlessly target for protests and political screeds while the real gun advocacy groups do their work in the background.
You can rely on the NRA blaming violent video games like clockwork every mass shooting.
I will say though, the pure correlation, timeline-wise, is persuasive for someone who hasn't thought much about the cultural wreckage of the US.
The GOA and FPC are MUCH better organizations to support for pro-firearms ownership and 2A rights.
Tell that to my liberal Fudd neighbors who despite owning guns believe the NRA is an evil political activist group that only exists to do the bidding of Republicans and kill schoolchildren.
But you addressed that in the decoy part. So maybe we shouldn't tell them.
Yep, you're either pro 2nd amendment completely or a Liberty safe employee.
But they're for free trade and high gdp, the ultimate conservatism!
You can sell a box of dogshit for $10 back and forth and it'll count as a $20 increase in GDP.
It doesn't matter if noone can build any wealth as long as the graph go up!
They're owned by private equity so...
You cannot be "conservative" and believe women should have any say in politics. Once you understand this to be true, then you'll easily be able to figure out how "conservative" a political group involving only women is.
For the majority due to a higher collectivist bias, probably but there are some great conservative women around.
The biggest historical one would probably be Olga of Kiev, what's more conservative than raising your son to be a great leader and sticking by your husband with a 'till death do us part.....and if anyone is the cause of your death, I'm genociding their whole fucking society!'
Exceptions don't make the rule. Even though exceptional women do exist, we would be better off if we pretended these women didn't exist and treated all women as inferior to men rather than trying to figure out who the exceptional women are and are not.
Listen, if we find out there's another badass bitch like that living in this world right now, I'm giving the same rights as us guys, as I like having my reproductive organs intact and in working order.
Plus she'd be WAY more conservative than a lot of men (points to those in blue cities)
Once you allow exceptions, you are admitting its just your personal bias and how much you like them defining who is and isn't worthy.
It seems a very similar parallel to "Based Black Man": within a proper (functional) environment they can hold even higher standards than the average man. But given improper incentives...well we see the effects today.
It's weird watching this sentiment contrast with TheImp's "women did Nazism."
Me and Imp are both about as "anti-women" and "pro-men" as they come but yes, we seem to have very different conceptions of what the ideal to realize that is.
I would say I am very much the pinnacle of what a pure patriarchy would be while still trying to sustain and grow a civilization by incorporating women in said society, whereas Imp seems to be more focused on entirely removing men from having any relationship to women whatsoever regardless of the impacts this would have on society or its sustainability.
He claims that is a tactic to pressure women into doing what we want. If you point out that it won't work because women would indeed let the species be destroyed to keep acting however the hell they want to act, he will simply say that proves he is right about women.
I'm stuck on the liars that are just cheaters. But, they believe they're monogomous because one part didn't know the relationship was open on the others side. You know those cheaters don't think they're poly. They are, they're just not very ethical to their non poly partner.
A walking std is a walking std no matter what they call themselves.