Politics thread (USA Elections 2016) - Page 185

I dont see how its taken as he'd like to be the father.

His take is standard dumb conservative crap, nothing particularly insane.


BTW what's with the right now pushing for banning porn?, are they racing the left on who sabotages their own movement faster? lol.

why biology is conservative

gregor mendel was a drumpf supporter?

A tight nuclear family consisting of a honest hard working man married to a sweet submissive wife that bears him children and cares for them, that is the utopia for the traditionalist, to believe that women's hapiness is intrinsecally tied to motherhood is a belief that most conservatives hold, as you probably do.

Sadly the True Christian from the Gospels is against the sensual outside of marriage. Banning porn is laughable though. The True Christian doesn't watch porn or masturbate in a world of temptation or they sin and then repent in solitary prayer and move on. No fucking oaths or dystopian laws or confessionals.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-50740323?ocid=socialflow_twitter

So an artist made a gay-painting of Emiliano Zapata, one of Mexico's revolution leaders and the indigenous farmers deemed it disrespectful so they beat the shit out of the LGBT supporters and want to storm into the Museum and burn the painting down.

The progressive left fighting the economical left over a painting lol.

gosh people have way too much free time on their hands to react with such bullshit

From news reporting from the old times to news outlets actually taking sides and owned by said sides. This is the reason I don't encourage my children to have kids of their own (if they don't want to). Nobody's waking up from this thing and it'll only get worse and worse no matter who's in power. People have just given up on their leaders and politics have turned into the only high rating shows left in traditional media networks.

On December 11 2019 03:46 Baalim wrote: A tight nuclear family consisting of a honest hard working man married to a sweet submissive wife that bears him children and cares for them, that is the utopia for the traditionalist, to believe that women's hapiness is intrinsecally tied to motherhood is a belief that most conservatives hold, as you probably do.

women's happiness? if you show me someone who understands women's happiness i will call up god and have him reset the universe because it's been solved

idk/idc about women's happiness, but the survival of your offspring, your tribe, and your species all depend completely on motherhood

and i don't know where this "nuclear family" meme comes from like republicans hate grandmas or some fucking thing what are you talking about. but yeah three men and a baby is a ted danson movie, not a blueprint for organizing a society

why do you have to be a conservative to realize kids come from parents, this is making me realize your erudite anarcho-capitalism is just hippy rebellion

oh forgot in point of fact women self-report as being less happy than 50 years ago

I guess we should take their voting rights away and Handmaid's tale them then


People in general report being less happy than 50 years ago. Hell people in my country were definitely happier during hardcore dictatorship socialism when they had to wait in lines for food.

Did you know that happy memories are the ones that last in the long run, while negative emotions are forgotten? Thought its well-known fact in poker communities

Edit:

Do you know what really matters though? Facts that are actually measurable like we're at the peak of society and its mainly due to women not being forced into home carers from 14yo till the moment they die

On December 11 2019 14:23 Santafairy wrote: women's happiness? if you show me someone who understands women's happiness i will call up god and have him reset the universe because it's been solved... oh forgot in point of fact women self-report as being less happy than 50 years ago

"pfff I'm not pretending to know anything about women happiness however its a fact women self reported being happier when they embraced motherhood"

idk/idc about women's happiness, but the survival of your offspring, your tribe, and your species all depend completely on motherhood

Yes because Stefan is claiming that Taylor Swift should bear children for the survival of humankind... not because she is gonna miss out on motherhood and hapiness right?

why do you have to be a conservative to realize kids come from parents, this is making me realize your erudite anarcho-capitalism is just hippy rebellion

Pointing out that its a conservative position to equate women fulfillment through motherhood = not knowing kids comes from parents, brilliant argument.

since when are libertarian tendencies hippy in any way?

https://berniesanders.com/issues/high-speed-internet-all/


Bernie wants state controlled internet... what could go wrong with that? cof china cof

Where do you get state controlled from state provided? This seems lazy in a bad way.

I haven't studied it but aren't his positions on net neutrality among the best of any american politician?

On December 11 2019 20:41 Spitfiree wrote: I guess we should take their voting rights away and Handmaid's tale them then

i didn't actually read this literature but voting rights is more of an argument about intelligence than happiness afaik

On December 11 2019 20:41 Spitfiree wrote: People in general report being less happy than 50 years ago. Hell people in my country were definitely happier during hardcore dictatorship socialism when they had to wait in lines for food. Did you know that happy memories are the ones that last in the long run, while negative emotions are forgotten? Thought its well-known fact in poker communities

there's an inherent sexism to thinking that what you just said supports your position. men are also less happy than before? wow tradition sucks even more now?

and what did you think your point was. okay let's assume people are too stupid to know when they're happy like you say. so women also don't know when they're really happy, which is raising children, for example, and it's our job to tell them?

On December 11 2019 20:41 Spitfiree wrote: Do you know what really matters though? Facts that are actually measurable like we're at the peak of society and its mainly due to women not being forced into home carers from 14yo till the moment they die

do you know what a peak is? it's the place that's as high as you can get and then you start going back down. cliche bullshit about 14 year old chattel like that's the issue at all.

Taylor Alison Swift is an American singer-songwriter. She is known for narrative songs about her personal life, which have received widespread media coverage. At age 14, she became the youngest artist signed by the Sony/ATV Music publishing house

yeah don't enslave your 14 year old girls into arranged marriages! just sign them to record labels so they slave away entertaining the plebs and sing and dance while making bank for us and then die childless emcels instead. this is definitely the moral high ground.

On December 12 2019 00:53 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On December 11 2019 14:23 Santafairy wrote: women's happiness? if you show me someone who understands women's happiness i will call up god and have him reset the universe because it's been solved... oh forgot in point of fact women self-report as being less happy than 50 years ago "pfff I'm not pretending to know anything about women happiness however its a fact women self reported being happier when they embraced motherhood"

i mean you brought up women's happiness i just thought you should know the facts

On December 12 2019 00:53 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + idk/idc about women's happiness, but the survival of your offspring, your tribe, and your species all depend completely on motherhood Yes because Stefan is claiming that Taylor Swift should bear children for the survival of humankind... not because she is gonna miss out on motherhood and hapiness right?

this is basic distributed responsibility. of course one person's parenthood or sterility isn't linked to our survival. but collectively it is.

yeah women have a short biological opportunity for motherhood which you can ask cat ladies or pre-cat ladies how they feel. sure one woman can be happy without kids. no shit. all women without kids is unhappy women, unhappy men, and no civilization

you're reading a bunch of shit into what he said about muh submissive woman muh nuclear family that he didn't say fuck all about. the sexism is on your side because of the tacit premise of assuming a rich successful woman is too inept to add children to her life without some fucking 1950s meme patriarchal framework. taylor swift good. parenting good. taylor swift parenting good. how do you saps get riled up into controversy about something as basic as the creation of human beings of which you are one

On December 12 2019 00:53 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + why do you have to be a conservative to realize kids come from parents, this is making me realize your erudite anarcho-capitalism is just hippy rebellion Pointing out that its a conservative position to equate women fulfillment through motherhood = not knowing kids comes from parents, brilliant argument. since when are libertarian tendencies hippy in any way?

HOW IS THIS A CONSERVATIVE POSITION? IS THE OPPOSING LIBERAL VIEW THAT MEN'S FULFILLMENT COMES THROUGH MOTHERHOOD?

I'm basically calling your entire argument bullshit since happiness isn't something measurable and those 'reports' don't mean shit. The standard of living is something measurable however and its obvious there are far less people living in poverty, much more people are educated, free, living in places where basic human rights are not violated etc.

The fact that rates of mental issues e.g. depression, anxiety etc. are at their all time high doesn't mean you should revert all the progress and put women back as care givers? Obviously, if that's what a woman feels like doing thats cool. However, your argument has zero rationality behind it, its just looking at two completely untangible variables and making conclusion based on them. Something as relatable would be like saying "hm there were more bees during Nazi Germany, makes sense to get Nazi Germany back so we save the bees"

The fact that you don't realize it is mind boggling

FWIW you're also intellectually dishonest, since "continuing the genetics chain" isn't really an issue our species have at the moment. Problems like the risk of wiping ourselves due to nuclear weapons or needing to colonize a new planet and find technologies to get out of our solar system are probably much higher in the level of requirements our species need to "survive"


I just wonder what your take is on the abortion ban in the US .. .guessing you're fine with it

Then again my take on traditions is the same as my take on money. The only "importance" and "value" both have is whatever society think they have. You have much more in common with people that grew up having the same standard of living, had close to your level education and interests than people that share your traditions. So in the sense of traditions building bonds, there are actually way better tools... that is of course, in case that you don't blindly follow things, which traditionalists usually do.

But sure if you want to look into traditions we can go ahead and I can just bring out data showing how majority of the ones that we've just 'inherited' are more harmful than anything (the traditions themselves are not inheritly harmful is how people during those times act that is harmful if anything, but they're quite intertwined so..). We just take them in, since its something we've been programmed to do since little kids and its taken in as the 'normal. e.g. the election day in the US being a weekday.

On December 12 2019 15:19 Liquid`Drone wrote: Where do you get state controlled from state provided? This seems lazy in a bad way. I haven't studied it but aren't his positions on net neutrality among the best of any american politician?

oh the government will provide it and own it, but it wont control it sure thing dude -_-

Less than 4% of the US doesn't have access to broadband internet and their internet is affordable, does this sound like a situation in which the state must step in?

On December 12 2019 16:23 Santafairy wrote: yeah women have a short biological opportunity for motherhood which you can ask cat ladies or pre-cat ladies how they feel. sure one woman can be happy without kids. no shit. all women without kids is unhappy women, unhappy men, and no civilization

End of civilization? there are 7 billion people in this world and we keep growing exponentially and fucking ain't going out ot style any time soon.

Overpopulation is millions of times a greater threat than suddenly people stop reproducing to extintion.

You are the Greta Thunberg of fertility lol.

HOW IS THIS A CONSERVATIVE POSITION? IS THE OPPOSING LIBERAL VIEW THAT MEN'S FULFILLMENT COMES THROUGH MOTHERHOOD?

The liberal position is that motherhood isn't the only path of realization for women, liberals challenge traditional societal roles, conservatives don't, by fucking definition.



Conservatives want traditional familites, housewives and children, liberals don't value that vision as much.... Why am I ever arguing this obvious things that everybody knows? I thought we reached peak stupidity while discussing Gulags with Loco but you sir are trying hard to top this.

aaaaaaaand the Labor party got curb stomped in the UK elections, good but man Johnson is such a twat, he really resembles Trump but definitelly smarter.

Johnson is a good example of what will happen to democrats in 2020 cause of using their same methods and tricks and not being related to their electorate in any way. Even though Johnson will now finalize Brexit he still got a crushing majority

On December 13 2019 04:09 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On December 12 2019 15:19 Liquid`Drone wrote: Where do you get state controlled from state provided? This seems lazy in a bad way. I haven't studied it but aren't his positions on net neutrality among the best of any american politician? oh the government will provide it and own it, but it wont control it sure thing dude -_- Less than 4% of the US doesn't have access to broadband internet and their internet is affordable, does this sound like a situation in which the state must step in?

His goal stated on the web page is to use anti trust laws to break up the internet monopolies, so people can have cheaper access to the internet. he doesn't mention nationalisation

On December 13 2019 08:50 Spitfiree wrote: Johnson is a good example of what will happen to democrats in 2020 cause of using their same methods and tricks and not being related to their electorate in any way. Even though Johnson will now finalize Brexit he still got a crushing majority

I think the lesson from the British election is that the democrats lose no matter what it does. If it selects a Social Democrat to run for president, they get ignored or lied about to the point that would make stalin proud, thus losing the election. If it selects an establishment figure like Hilary or Biden, they lose because everyone knows they represent the establishment. The only way social democrats can get into power is public pressure from below, this was true in the 1930's.