Controversial General Political Discussion

[Jew D. Boy]

This thread never needed a @Jew D. Boy take more than now

What’s there to say?? Roku is doing a fine job of showing everybody why conservatives have a reputation for being ass-backward bigots, he doesn’t need any help from the Jewboy
[automerge]1765138151[/automerge]
Anyway, only 1000 more posts until 69420!! Based on the way our babies are melting down, we’ll get there by Thursday
[automerge]1765138326[/automerge]
@AL sama Are we really and truly just not allowed to call a spade a race-baiting spade?? I’m confused as to why you’re bending over backwards to prevent us from using the most obvious and appropriate name for what he continuously tells us he is

 

[Uncle Van]

In all seriousness, labels are only bad/insults when used inaccurately, which they are 90% of the time. If someone says they dont support gay marriage cause of their religion, you'd be in trouble of you call them a fascist. If they say being gay is an abomination and a blight on the country so they all should be removed from the country by any means, then calling them a fascist is more accurate since getting rid of "inferiors" in the name of national purity or prosperity is a key trait of fascism.

 

[CoC: Color of Clowns]

Insurance is like religion is to god, in that insurance works to keep sick people from getting healthcare, the same way religion works to keep people from Jesus/Buddha's true messages (as well as those of others).

Gonna make a thread soon on why science will always be superior to religion, as science lets you reach God/Source personally, while religion sells you distorted bits and pieces.

Religion in general is designed to censor science and keep people from using logic/observation to find truth.

Science will always be superior to religion because science is based around honest observation of reality and describing it rationally, while religion is based on people trying to prove agendas that were created out of emotion/desire, not logic.

Religion is about trying to prove a hypothesis, and ignoring the evidence that proves it wrong, while true science necessitates being willing to change your mind.

The biggest stain on science/healthcare we have is religion.

Look at how many women have been murdered because of who fucked them/how the baby was coming out.

A scientist seeks to prove the existence of god, or lack thereof. A cultists seeks to destroy evidence that questions god.

You cannot negotiate with people arguing in bad faith, and anyone who wants to tell you their book written by freaky ass geezers hundreds of years ago proves anything, have already decided to chase fairly tales, rather than learn from the world around them, and the history that their cults have censored.

I've come to the conclusion that any religious cultist cannot practice real science, because their concept of spirituality is poisoned by their predispositions to believing their God exists, with very little evidence to claim as such.

Whereas the people who espouse the idea that God is a universal consciousness, rather than a racist old codger smiting people from on high, have much more evidence.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a65635986/is-the-universe-god-pantheism/

https://thedebrief.org/new-study-cl...re-the-big-bang-and-still-shapes-our-reality/

Hilarious to me that String Theory led all the way back to the beginning. Everything is fractal. One piece of light, in an infinite sea of darkness, dividing to multiply infinitely, just like our cells.

This is just ramblings, though, I need to get good sources together for the thread.

 

[Jew D. Boy]

In all seriousness, labels are only bad/insults when used inaccurately, which they are 90% of the time. If someone says they dont support gay marriage cause of their religion, you'd be in trouble of you call them a fascist. If they say being gay is an abomination and a blight on the country so they all should be removed from the country by any means, then calling them a fascist is more accurate since getting rid of "inferiors" in the name of national purity or prosperity is a key trait of fascism.

Tell that to Dear Leader Al, he’s apparently the final arbiter of words around here and he doesn’t want anyone hurting the feelings of someone who won’t stop spewing unfiltered hate rhetoric

 

[Logiko]

In all seriousness, labels are only bad/insults when used inaccurately, which they are 90% of the time.

Labels are labels. They are meant:
- To shock the target
- To warn others

The point is not the disrespect, it's to call out a political stance. Cut that possibility out, even if used badly, and you create a situation of danger as proven today very simply. This is what I tried to explain for years.

The point is not the nature of the labels. We don't care about that. The point is the absolute necessity to be able to use them, even wrongly.

Insults are insults, labels are labels. You will never see me be mad by being called a fascist, at best, I'll laugh it out. Simply because this is not about me, it's about the vision someone has of my political stance.

If someone says they dont support gay marriage cause of their religion, you'd be in trouble of you call them a fascist.

So what?

What is so important to protect here? What kind of trauma does a fascist or a racist or a reactionnary person risk to get by being called out with exageration?

Nothing. The problem here - and the reason why I need to find a way out - is simple:

If this place value the sensibility of a fascist/racist/"factual datas" more than they value a strong ethical stance and the lives of people who can actually be hurt by the rethoric of these people (like I was), then there is nothing worth saving here.

I wanted you guyz to have this discussion. To choose between three very contradicting world.

- Either a place where we allow fascist to speak and we prevent others from calling them out (my threadban)
- Either a place where we allow everything (including letting people hurt others or call out fascist rethoric and people)
- Either a place where we make the stance not to allow fascist/hatefull rethoric (and we find new solutions togethers to make this place work)

I asked clearly and the team refused this discussion, thus choosing by defaut the first option..

This means that - by pure logic - we interact in a potentially highly dangerous place

 

[RyoQ]

You need to listen to people, my guy. Your attitude is very ignorant. RyoQ comments are very rude and insensitive at best; worst case scenario, it's racism. You don't look good by trying to shame people that call this type of behavior out.

Rude, insensitive are the words my takes are decried as. But never wrong. You and the collective crybullying at Al will not work

 

[CoC: Color of Clowns]

https://www.reddit.com/r/goodnews/comments/1pgl3j5
LOL, the angry look on their faces. Lying ghouls acting like they're protecting the public, when the American public is coming together to protect each other from their cheeto stained sins.

Get out of here, you kidnapping creeps.

 

[RyoQ]

Europeans will get the Karma they deserve some day for their actions

 

[Monster Zoro's Tesla Supplier]

Did you even read the fucking posts, or are you just trying to bait me into a ban like always? Guy made some very nasty comments about black people. I got banned before for less. I didn't even report shit. Take your own advice and leave me the fuck alone. You are very sensitive when people mock your religion; you are not so energetic when others are insulted, though, hypocrite.

What's his religion anyway

 

[RyoQ]

The problem is that RyoQ make a very broad statement about an entire race because of the opinion of a single user. I'm sure there are Black people out there that don't really give a fuck about any holidays, history, and so on. It sounded like an unnecessary insult towards Black people, to be honest.

Person A: one generality is that X is often Y, or more often Y than A, B and C are.

Person B: "BUT THIS PARTICULAR X IS NOT Y!!"

Commenting upon generalities is always an IQ filter, and you have failed

 

[AL sama]

What's his religion anyway

I don't know why he said that lol

I m not very religious and often challenge my teachings you can ask @Logiko lol

I m a Muslim btw

 

[Logiko]

I m not very religious and often challenge my teachings you can ask @Logiko lol

It's true.

 

[Mathias]

Sometimes people have heated arguments with people they would never talk to in real life.

 

[AverageBuggyEnjoyer]

 

[Monster Zoro's Tesla Supplier]

I don't know why he said that lol

I m not very religious and often challenge my teachings you can ask @Logiko lol

Sure you aren't..

 

[Uncle Van]

What's his religion anyway

Jamaica

 

[Logiko]

Sometimes people have heated arguments with people they would never talk to in real life.

True, but we are technically in real life still.

 

[Monster Zoro's Tesla Supplier]

True, but we are technically in real life still.

If we were in real life I feel like 98% of this forum wouldn't talk like they do on here

 

[Logiko]

If we were in real life I feel like 98% of this forum wouldn't talk like they do on here

Yeah maybe..

Perhaps we should ask ourselves why.

 

[Uncle Van]

If we were in real life I feel like 98% of this forum wouldn't talk like they do on here

Its only because there are tangible consequences in real life. Imagine what people will do and say if more horrible shit was legal? Open discrimination was legal barely 60 years ago in the US alone.