So, basically, we're in the lore blurb of Cyberpunk, in the lead up to the corporate wars.
Wunderbar. Hans, get ze panzer. Nein, nein, get ze Königstiger.
This is because we are not at the thin end of the wedge for those issues. We are quite a ways up the wedge.
This new shit is the thin end of a NEW wedge being driven into the body of society, and that thin edge always starts with such "indefensible" issues that are done by the Bad Guys.
Maybe realize that defending civil rights has your primarily defending scoundrels and na'er do wells, because legislation against them is the thin edge of the wedge for legislation that targets you.
In a perfect world, these ID verification systems would be a good idea. Our world is so far from perfect, and the people who run it so asinine and malicious, that we must fight ANY advancement of their bullshit, no matter how nice it sounds in paper. The poison pill has a sweet outer coat, after all.
Seriously. It rustles my jimmies that do many people can't understand that the post in question is having a laugh about the whole thing, and "existential crisis" is bloody hyperbole like you use in most humor.
On average, black men apparently have smaller dicks.
The whole "bbc" thing is just more jew-owned porn site propaganda. Same as the pseudo-incest step-whatever garbage that pollutes every front page.
I reckon this'll get me called a jew sympathizer by at least one person, but I do want to point out that this testimony is functionally identical to "and then they shot the children and laughed" holocaust "survivor accounts". All its missing is the curvy shotgun anecdote.
You shouldn't doubt that people do awful things, and that some tiny amount of those awful things will be extremely, cartoonishly evil things, but you should also remain aware that most of the stories out of that region are psyop bullshit.
And this sounds like a pile of children's shoes.
Ami Arifi, 29, Gezhim Xhafa, 28, and Sohqib Shakibi, 24...
Whaddayamean, those are good, strong, traditional English names.
Sure, imagine what you like, retard.
Friend, I'm not sure you want to cede that ground to the small hat tribe.
You really, really don't want to become known as the retard who only speaks nigger speak and thinks having a vocabulary above the third grade level "sounds jewish".
Cute. Yes, certainly we can abandon modern English and return to middle English. That is absolutely and exactly what I said; an excellent interpretation, to be sure!
Or you people could make just the smallest effort and speak like men, instead of like apes. Honestly, that'd be enough. Just drop the ape noises and return to the tongue of men.
Honestly, I'm not sure why I make the effort to respond to this level of bad faith nonsense. You're either screwing around to be annoying, or you have literal brain rot, and in either case, I have crawled into the mud with the swine, who have the advantage of wisdom of and familiarity with the environment.
Child, that there is two paragraphs and a sentence. And the second paragraph barely counts, given the reading level for it is first grade.
You shouldn't so proudly advertise your incompetence. It's not the mark of pride you seem to regard it as.
There is nothing funny about descending into hooting nigger speech, and if you think there is, you have no place criticizing others for deficiencies, real or imagined, in their cognitive capabilites, for you have the most terminal of brain rot already chewing through your frontal lobe.
Or, to put it in language you may perhaps be able to understand, dere aint noffin funny 'bout callen some gurl THICC AF cuz u be soundin like a nigga.
Learn to express yourself in better ways.
Must every conversation slide into the mud of nigger speech?
Do so many people in the blighted age of $currentyear lack the ability to express an appreciation of beauty in a manner more befitting of men than of screeching baboons?
Truly, these generations are fallen. Millions must perish.
Jew-controlled.
He meant Jew-controlled.
Alright, sure, but how does that discredit her?
Are you listening to her for autism, news, sperging, and memes, or are you listening to her because you want to fuck her?
I don't give a shit what she looks like, and I'm not sure why anyone who only interacts with her online would.
Yeah, that worked great for all those societies in human history. Like the one who performed human sacrifices, even children, muslim countries were women are basically objects, communism where they can kill or enslave any citizen they want, dictatorships like North Korea or extreme Authoritarianism like China where there's no private life and people can boarded up in their own homes...
Look at the most civilised countries in the world, by "coincidence", they are almost all funded on Christians beliefs.
No, no, please, continue cherry picking examples. We don't need to discuss extreme christian examples like inquisition-era Spain, or any part of the Byzantine empire, nor do we need to discuss any abuses done by the christian or catholic church. It was always exactly perfect in your specific examples, and certainly perfect elsewhere. And we certainly don't need to discuss successful and prosperous civilizations like ancient china, or greece, or rome, or any of a bunch of other non-christian nations. They never existed, since we've not chosen them while cherry picking.
Also, it's rich to try to tar the mohammedians with a "children and women are objects, not people" when the exact same requirements appear in christian, catholic, and jewish traditions as well. Almost like there was a common ancestor religion that had a bunch of breakaways...
But never mind that. As we know, jesus people good, mohammed people bad.
Even heard of the Old Testament? The part that's the majority of the Bible?
Plenty of laws were written in it, while all their neighbours had instead terrible laws and morals.
Something something Code of Hammurabi something something oldest known legal codex with moral prescriptions something something basis for a lot of classic legal systems.
And, again, we'll skip over inconvenient places like the mediterranean, where people made perfectly functional laws and societies while worshipping a completely different set of magic sky kings, and oddly enough seemed to prosper.
If it's your "own moral" and nothing else, then it doesn't matter. What matters is the moral the society you live in use. If you don't believe abortions is moral, yet the entire society thinks so, do you think "Judging them" is going to change anything at all?
Meanwhile, they can think that killing you is moral because you don't agree with their points and you're a danger to society (exactly what the modern Left is doing right now).
At the risk of being accused of fedposting, judging people for their actions does plenty if and when you act in it. If you just retreat to your jesus safety blanket and say "my god calls that a sin! You are the bad people!", well, all you've done is bloviated and patted yourself on the back while, in your estimation, innocent babies were being murdered.
What was that old quote, that all it takes for evil to win is for good men to do nothing, or something to that effect? That's you, the good man doing less then nothing, because you have a religion to hide inside to support your moral code.
And as for my enemies, they can think killing me is moral all day, until they begin to act on it. At which point I will judge them with my morals, and my morals are cast in steel and etched in brass. Again, at the risk of being called an internet tough guy or a glowie, I don't need anyone's god to tell me what is right or wrong, and I don't need anyone's church to serve as the impetus for my actions.
Why do you? Am I somehow that much better than you? I don't believe so; I like to imagine we're fairly comparable as individuals. Surely we can both stand out in the cold and do the hard tasks that need to be done, without the need for a safety blanket drsped over our backs and clasped around our throats.
Ok, and how do you define what's moral or not, if there's no absolutely morality laying above humans, anyway?
Arbitrarily, the same way we define anything that doesn't have a basis in physical reality. We decide it for ourselves, agree to a society-wide agreeable standard, and go with that.
We don't need to make up a magic sky king to enforce these things on us. People were good and decent before the jesus cult, and they'll figure out how to be good and decent long after it's died out.
Because according to those pedos, what they're doing is perfectly moral, hence why they keep doing it. Meanwhile, trying to stop them would, thus, be considered immoral.
The fact that morals are relative doesn't stop you from making judgements or enforcing your own morals. It doesn't matter if they think it's moral if you do not; you can still judge them as a person. You simply want the comforting blanket of a pocket-nuke equivalent that you can point to as your biggest stick when your foes refuse your demands. That's always what religion was: the absolute authority that people were told to follow else they face absolute destruction and eternal punishment.
You don't need religion to have morality. You simply use religion to enforce a moral system.
If that's all you can comprehend from what I wrote, it's eminently absurd for you to call someone else a midwit.
Look, here's the simple deal. You don't want others to say something about your religion? Stop bringing it up in unrelated conversations.
Super quick and easy way to avoid having you jimmies rustled.
Otherwise, you're gonna have to deal with the fact that some people aren't in your cult, or heaven forfend, in any fucking cult, and aren't shy about letting you know that.
Or, since I get the impression you have a brick in place of a brain and need a tl;dr, if you don't insert "but muh jesus..." into random unrelated stuff, I won't say "fuck off with your jesus".
Living life based around religious and tribal nonsense is how we got into this mess, and why the goat fuckers in the sandbox remain the way they are.
Maybe instead of asking "what would magic sky king tell me to do?", ask " what would a good and moral man tell himself to do?", and live life around that.
Anyway, that's why the tree of liberty needs to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants, and while we may be lacking in the former, we sure do have a surplus of the latter...
Go home, child.
Bullshit KiA started as athiest and "saw the light". The board was flooded with religious fuckwits as they were driven out of other communities, and the Johnny come lately-s simpliy outnumber the core old guard.
But that's not the point. The point is a simple discussion of morals, which for you and apparently many others seem to only come from religion, and yet you fucking dive headfirst into preference utilitarianism for WHICH religion produced the society YOU think is best, and yet you SOMEHOW have the fuckall brain capacity that can't connect these two dots, separated as they are by the grand gulf of a few millimeters, that there aren't objective morals, but rather systems of morsl frameworks that prioritize different things and lead to different outcomes.
You can judge the relative morals on whatever criteria you want, and make declarations on whether a system meets your criteria or not, but you cannot point to a system that generates objective and correct morals, EVEN WHEN you dig through your scrapbook of gods and churches.
And kindly go fuck yourself with a hand grenade whose pin is removed and which has been slathered in bullet ants when you say I don't respect the value of old traditions. I am more traditionalist then half this fucking board at this stage, except in the religion thing, and that's mostly because my ancestors live in eastern Europe and don't have much truck with gods and churches. Tradition is the answer our great grandparents came up with for questions we've forgotten how to even ask, certainly, but not EVERY tradition was the CORRECT answer. Deriving morality from ancient fiction is no more correct then leaving out an offering of milk for the fae so they don't sour the rest of your stock. You can pull some useful morals from any religious text, because so much of it is tied to the human condition, but to tie those useful facts to the fiction of gods and talking snakes and split oceans is retarded.
And stick another hand grenade up there for saying I'm here specifically to shit on Christians. You guys are retarded, but you've been relatively harmless for a few decades. I'll go back to you once the mudslime and jew questions have been answered, and even then only if your start regaining institutional power. I lived through the moral panics of the 80s and 90s by the christian right, and I'll be damned before I see that power returned to you.
Grab a third one for suggesting I, or anyone, read Nietzsche. The man was a hack.
Its nice to see the balkanization of the internet has resulted in a nice, even mix of retards and adults with the mental development of small children on both side, at least.
Confirms some basic theories about humanity.
Anyway, have a day. Nice, shitty, whatever, I'm done caring. At this point, I've had more productive conversations with actual retarded people.
Yeah, that's a little different from "she went to a doctor and recieved a medication / had a procedure done".
That's an abortion roofie.
Alright, so after all that, you've circled us back to square one, that being that you claim to an objective fact you cannot observe nor derive, and when challenged to present evidence for your, and I'll say again for emphasis, supposedly objectively verifiable standard, the replies furnished have been references to a children's movie about space wizards fighting with plasma swords and simple psionics and a few childish insults.
And yet you prance and preen as though you have won some great victory and demonstrated your righteousness. You call me blind and say I refuse to accept evidence without actually presenting any. You say I have no convictions because I refuse to capitulate in total to your ideas.
And you see nothing foul in this behavior. This is your just and moral act. Even if the objective morality you claim to exist would decry such lies and falsehoods, and would compel you to seek truth and understanding, if you actually chose to follow it.
If that isn't itself a poignant instance of revealed preferences showcasing that either you also understand subconsciously that morals are relative and use that to fuel your self-righteousness in the moment as you allow your "objective" standards to mold and shift, or you yourself fail to life up to the simplest tenants of a system you insist is clear and objective, which strongly suggests that perhaps there isn't an objective morality that permeates all of humankind the same way gravity suffuses the area around the Earth, since you can so easily defy the former and require such effort to defy the latter.
Regardless of which of the two it is, the crux of the matter is that you still haven't actually produced any evidence for the existence of objective morality. The only argument presented, which I can't recall if it was by you or by someone else, was that christian-pattern nations TENDED to more often than other produce prosperous nations then others, and that's no argument for objectivity; merely an argument for the utility of that set of relative morals as compared to others in the context of nation building.
So, please, go ahead and actually produce some evidence. I'm perfectly willing to examine evidence as soon as any is actually furnished.
You make some good points about law, but this one here I'll take umbrage with. She should absolutely call a nigger a nigger if he or she is being a nigger. There's plenty of decent black people, young and old, that don't act like niggers and instead act like decent and normal human beings, but here you must call a spade a spade.
Its like that old Chris Rock bit about black people vs niggers. Niggerdom isn't really a skin color; it's an attitude and pattern of behavior. And a child practicing his petty theivery by stealing money from a diaper bag is representative of the attitude and pattern of behavior.
I find nothing reprehensible about her actions, and even if we were to entertain special nigger word privileges for who can and can't say it, I'd point out that such moral considerations are for friend groups only; nobody would have batted an eye if it were a black lady calling a white child slurs.
Also, it's funny how much casting Power Word N upsets people, so you should do it more often.