Kulturkampf's Fun-Time Philosophy Jamboree! (merged)

[Kulturkampf]

Sacrifice is the basis of all morality because the fundamental essence of the human being is one that is self-centered and demanding. The human is wired like all animals: it desires foremost to survive, and anything beyond survival focuses on attaining pleasure. As Freud noted, the human animal in its basic form, its "id," focuses on attaining pleasure and avoiding pain.

Morality is often measured by how much sacrifice is made.

Saints sacrifice their animal instincts often in acts of martyrdom, or in dedicating their free time to helping the impoverished to such an extent that they choose poverty and celibacy in order to dedicate the whole of themselves to others.

All people within a society must sacrifice -- a father and mother must work hard to support the child who is too young to support themselves. A friend who does not sacrifice a portion of themselves for the other person is not truly upholding their friendship.

In marriage and sexual relationships, people often enter agreements that entail sacrifice -- in order to not produce feelings of jealousy, people do not engage in sex outside of their relationship or only do so under specific agreements. Any relationship where there are not agreements on boundaries of sexuality is doomed to producing innate feelings of jealousy in any human. The human animal naturally wants a sense of security and consistency and not to be left dependent on the whims of their partner -- the notion of not having such agreements is alien to most relationships because without this sense of sacrificing animal urges to be sexually fulfilled in any number of ways it takes away from the human desire for security of their possessions and a sense of elitism, dominance, etc. that plays to the ego.

In fact, in old relationships where women had no say in the sexual activities of their men (and vice versa) they cannot even really be deemed a relationship but rather a slave-like status to the un-empowered member of the union.

All of our ideas of sexual morality hinge around the notion of sacrificing the basic urge to mate with anything.

Our other agreements also involve sacrifice... We live in societies with rules that preclude theft, murder, etc. and in any society which has a concept of justice all members of it are bound by these laws. This means that all moral people within the society have subdued and ended their desires to murder or steal.

However, it is also important to note that as in the animal Kingdom there are plenty of humans who are fundamentally weaker and more cowardly than others; these people essentially make no sacrifice in the bargain, and if they are merely avoiding doing these things because they feel it will doom them they are basically not moral people. The only moral people within the society are the people capable of exploitation of others yet sacrifice their ability to do so because of the fact that they honor the bond within the community.

This is why child abuse is viewed as one of the lowest crimes: a child is defenseless against an able-bodied adult. Any person who abuses children is committing the most grievous of crimes against the community because they are preying on the weakest members of the society.

To live within a moral community one must have sacrifice; the more sacrifices made to help others proves the further distance that the person or community has made from its most basic animal urges to fulfill their bestial desires.

In a very real sense, Communism represents the most moral system, ideally, as it entails that all members of the community forsake luxury for the benefit of everyone.

Even if we were to believe that the 'rich are being rewarded for their hard labor' this would not be that moral in and of itself... For hard labor that is done for the sake of individual gain is not fundamentally moral.

Capitalism is an amoral idea in its essence and to some extent it is the government surrendering its role in the moral systems of the people and rather enabling the people to make their own choices.

People often wonder why war is glorified but the answer is quite simple: it is the ultimate sacrifice for the society and community as a whole. The warrior is the most honored occupation in any decent society because it is recognized as the most fundamental building block of the community. As such, Firefighters and Police are also held in high esteem.

An occupation should be valued by the amount of sacrifice given in the service to the community. But the sacrifice must be by the will of the person -- someone who performs moral tasks out of necessity is not actually doing anything moral. Moral action by coercion is not moral, but rather, it is enslaving another person.

In order to be a moral person one must not have a slave mentality and one must be in complete communion with their own Person and Desires. Only a free person, making a free choice, is capable of a moral action (this is why the notion of Free Will is strong in the Christian religion).

This is also why Christians should never intend to control the morality of the society as it fundamentally violates a tenet of their own religion.

This is why people who simply and cowardly go with the flow of the society gain no respect.

To go back to an idea of Henrik Ibsen -- he who stands most alone is most right, most strong, in many senses of the word; for the person who stands most alone is the person who is most capable of moral choice.

The lowest form of existence is mindlessness. The highest form of existence is mindful sacrifice in the name of those who are deserving.

Any society where the common person lives in a world without sacrifice is a society which is approaching its own death, for in the circumstance where sacrifice is continued for the existence of the society, the society crumbles.

Societies that enforce rote conformity are societies where moral actions become impossible; and societies that cultivate only individual indulgence begin failing in even being societies because the members of these communities have no moral connection to one another.

Freedom of choice is necessary for a moral society.

[Kulturkampf]

I wrote in another thread that morality requires the freedom of choice, the choice of sacrifice.

Thus, my conclusion is simple:

A moral individual must be free.

Without choice in their actions they are incapable of a moral act.

And more than this: a person who is moral must be making a decision in any moral act, and the ultimate decisions in morality stem from knowledge of the situation.

Thus: each individual must be an explorer of their own world and their own moral choices to come to realizations on what are proper and moral actions.

Thus: each individual must Live.

Thus: one must not simply just be following a Christian or other ethical system, but must be consciously doing so and doing so not in fear of hell, but rather in knowledge of the truth behind any such choice.

And so:

I spend my life exploring the basis of my own moral choices by understanding the ramifications of my own actions. Towards this end, I have even committed sins...

Oh, have I committed sins, and Oh, have I enjoyed and loathed each moment of it. It has produced a profound paradox of feelings inside of an individual and has lead to finding out what is the proper path for the fulfillment of the most moral life.

All people must understand their actions and their meanings...

This is why youth, intelligent youth, is characterized as embracing a sense of the wild: they have not yet gone through all of the stages of understanding their broad actions. And that's OK.

One has to sink to the lowest depths sometimes to understand why an action is immoral.

Sexual avarice, violence, etc. are fueled by emotions that are fundamental to a human -- the desire for sexual gratification, the desire for gratifying the impulses of revenge and anger, etc.

Until one understands the pain of sexual indulgence and the fruitlessness of the course one does not understand that monogamous relationships are the ideal path of one's choice -- it would take someone who is less doubting, less questioning to understand this. Of course, one can come to these conclusions by their own feelings of jealousy in sexual relationships and oddly this also produces a sense of revenge within the individual to harm others through their own vengeful, sexual indulgences.

Until one understands the pain and humiliation of physical violence enacted upon oneself or another, one might not understand why violence towards an opponent is unacceptable. It is clear, even in victory, that the thorough humiliation of an opponent often is excessive.

A beaten, broken individual looking up to you for mercy with swollen eyes and blood in their mouth is the greatest argument against fighting for no-good reason.

A jealous, spurned lover, feeling their inadequacies, with whom you have cultivated a close personal relationship is the greatest argument against sexual indulgence.

This is often why theft is one of the easiest things to justify: one does not often see the reactions of those from whom they stole, and one easily justifies their petty thefts by saying 'these people probably have enough.' Few people realize that often it is the common worker who suffers from theft.

Few people also realize that many artists whose work is pirated end up living impoverished lives because of it. A good example are the bands who have gained popularity through internet downloads yet still are normal functionaries in society -- bands like the Oppressed which have tens of thousands of people downloading their music annually but still depend on the earnings of a Pizza parlor in Cardiff, Wales.

I think that people with doubts on moral actions should experiment in them.

The easiest way to learn the truth of an action is to engage in it, to find the moral path within it.

Towards this end society should enable people to make their own choices on all levels so that they are capable of moral action.

[Kulturkampf]

In the modern age we find ourselves as never before surrounded by meaningless prosperity that historically marks the death of any civilized society; we see the morals of the world gnawed upon by the pathetic existence amongst hitherto unknown pleasures. Our humanity is undermined by new languages and ideas that prevent criticism and thoughtfulness; our humanity is put in jeopardy by forcefed decadence and materialism.

Our souls decay under the naked technologies which direct us into pointless futures measured by a warped sense of tolerance and misguided materialism.

It is impossible to find a shard of primordial grandeur in the world we have landed ourselves in. We have to recreate it using only our ancestral inspirations and the phlegm coughed up from our throats sickened by the pestilence of a dying civilization.

We look to attractive celebrities for advice and listen to politicians trying to placate us in exchange for votes, having no care for actual, objective truth and only interest in the subjective whims of the lowest common denominating voters. They even teach us to tolerate the intolerable in the name of ascertaining trade deals.

The basic essence of humanity has been recast into a mold of polity and decadence. We are to politely accept our bread & circuses from our governments and follow the prescribed rules they have agreed upon (because apparently the tyrannical rule of a stupid, ignorant majority is the new battle cry of the rulers who through long, tireless study have learned the proper messages to be presented so they can lap from the bowl of Pride & Power served by the ignorant masses they have made into their cheering crowds of maidservants and serfs).

I call for something older and bolder for our earthly existence -- I would like to see a new movement of people who reject every concept enacted upon us by modern, secular governments and decaying, equivocating religions.

Do not content yourself with the Now and do not have faith in the Future. It's all a lie wrapped up in a fancy box, presented to you as meaningful, but in reality they are only giving you a cold, dignity-free gift.

I want to see the world economy collapse and every visionless dreamer fall from their pedestal of decency. I want to see society cast into the cleansing fires of annihilation and rebuilt in its ashes.

I just have a few simple things that I would like to see the good people of the world do:

(1) Reject tolerance for morality.
(2) Reject decency for dignity.
(3) Reject peace for war, "the world's only hygiene" (F. T. Marinetti)
(4) Reject control for liberty.
(5) Reject vanity for truth.
(6) Reject money for time.
(7) Reject intellectualism for simplicity in action.

You must:

(8) Purge the religious of those who use it as a modern convenience.
(9) Purge the atheists of those who use it as a social statement.
(0) Above all else, every political institution must be mistruted until it has been destroyed and rebuilt on solid ground. Do not dwell in a broken, old house waiting to cave in.

To put it simply: everything you've learned and every article of indoctrination that you've received from any source which is compliant to the modern institutions of First World nations must be cast into doubt and passed through the meatgrinder. If anything useful is left from it, then you can take it and call it 'good.'

History teaches us that all civilizations have life-cycles. The downfalls of all civilizations are marked by what we are seeing today: licentiousness, luxury and self-indulgence.

There are currently no barbarian powers that cleanse the world of our civilizations so the task falls on the own members of the civilization to undermine its existence in every way -- but not in the name of decrying and destroying the values that it was founded on, as these values have already been destroyed by the civilization itself.

Rather, the attack most come from a new breed, a new horde of marauders, and it must be directed at every manifestation of our contemporary vanity and lies.

Contemporary culture and anything that is propping it up must be sabotaged and collapsed into a heap of trash. For it was this contemporary culture that raped the dignity and truth that was once embodied by our institutions in a time when Americans believed in Liberty.

A vague sense of anarchy and chaos must be promoted, and an effort to dethrone every empowered person must be made.

Every intellectual who wants to see the World Go On Living, As Usual, or uses a modern concepts of morality and decency to measure our existence, must be scorned and mocked.

The good people of the world must start over and find their truer roots, their truer basis; perhaps they must borrow from earlier times and bring their religions and governments back to square one; but this doesn't matter right now.

All that matters is that we fracture & destroy everything that we know and see every institution driven into the ground.

The modern era saw the death of all dignified barbarians in existence so we have to make ourselves into noble savages seeking the downfall of Our Global Culture Of Lunacy.

Form yourself into your tribes and clans, and attack the exposed hides of the nearest beasts until the only thing left standing that is sacred is the Human Spirit & the Human Mind.

Pull every skeleton out of the closet and cast doubt on every apparition of the contemporary.

Be the scourge of every thoughtless modernist who thinks there is truth in what the Left or the Right says. There is no Left or Right, there is no need for us to debate the details -- the best ideas will eventually rise to the top and form themselves into new civilizations and new orders, that is what happens; a veritable competition occurs between ideas.

But now ideas can no longer compete due to the stagnation we experience in our everyday world of contented bureaucrats and common people whose minds have been enslaved to a sick society.

No catalyst can launch us into proper reformation because the only ideas we are offered, today, are from poisoned wells. The only thing we can do is wait for the catalyst the announces the downfall of modern civilization itself.

Do not be satisfied until all we are left with is our liberty and ourselves.

[kahljorn]

To put it simply: everything you've learned and every article of indoctrination that you've received from any source which is compliant to the modern institutions of First World nations must be cast into doubt and passed through the meatgrinder.

What about the idea that the feminine is bad?

You talk like a preacher. Your arguments have very little or spurious reasoning. And often outright false premises.

[kahljorn]

your doctrines are contradictory ;\

anyway, if making sacrifices is the ultimate form of morality, then everybody should just kill themselves in order to be the most good. The most good.

In a very real sense, Communism represents the most moral system, ideally, as it entails that all members of the community forsake luxury for the benefit of everyone.Communism is becoming a slave to the community. It also isn't a moral system, it's a political system. Also, it's not for the benefit of everybody, but for the benefit of the weak. "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need."

People often wonder why war is glorified but the answer is quite simple: it is the ultimate sacrifice for the society and community as a whole.People don't go to war to make sacrifices. They go to war to survive, to conquer, to enforce their values on others, and to sack.


Capitalism is an amoral idea in its essence and to some extent it is the government surrendering its role in the moral systems of the people and rather enabling the people to make their own choices.That isn't what capitalism is, but whatever. Is it better to enforce a poor or weak system of morality than to allow people the freedom to be strong?
You said that morality can't exist without the freedom to make your own choices, but you are saying that capitalism is immoral because it lets people make their own choices instead of forcing people to make pre-approved choices?

are you sure you aren't a character?

However, it is also important to note that as in the animal Kingdom there are plenty of humans who are fundamentally weaker and more cowardly than others; these people essentially make no sacrifice in the bargain, and if they are merely avoiding doing these things because they feel it will doom them they are basically not moral people. The only moral people within the society are the people capable of exploitation of others yet sacrifice their ability to do so because of the fact that they honor the bond within the community.Excellent kantian argument. The problem is, those who are "Weak" are usually capable of being strong. Even some of the weakest men can pick up a gun and shoot their enemies, or keep their money instead of giving it to a charity. Remember in the bible when the poor woman donates money, even though its almost everything she has, its considered strength because of how weak she actually is. She is sacrificing more of her strength than a rich man. What is this.. uhhh utility.. exchange... ill remember the name.. marginal utility exchange.

by a similar principle weak people have the most to gain by picking up a gun, but they don't. Thus, a bigger sacrifice.
shrugamcshrug

The highest form of existence is mindful sacrifice in the name of those who are deserving.If people only sacrifice to be higher than other people, then they are just being vain.

[The One and Only...]

This is one terrible alt.

[kahljorn]

http://www.jmverville.com/?p=879
;\

[Big Papa Goat]

so how does this all fit into shaving your head and listening to crappy angry music?


because that's what's really important

[Big Papa Goat]

Hey, didn't Vince Zeb describe himself as some kind of catholic samurai or something once? I just thought of that for some reason looking at the seemingly Asian-ish motif in KKK's signature.

[Kulturkampf]

What about the idea that the feminine is bad?

You talk like a preacher. Your arguments have very little or spurious reasoning. And often outright false premises.

The feminine is bad to be mixed with the masculine, I guess. :)

This is one terrible alt.

Whati s an alt?

Hey, didn't Vince Zeb describe himself as some kind of catholic samurai or something once? I just thought of that for some reason looking at the seemingly Asian-ish motif in KKK's signature.

KKK? hahaha... Uhhhh....

I have lived in Asia for 3 years and some change, by the way.... In Korea......

I think Knights are better than Samurai. I think Vikings are cooler than Knights.

[Kulturkampf]

http://www.jmverville.com/?p=879
;\

That's my blog. :)

your doctrines are contradictory ;\

anyway, if making sacrifices is the ultimate form of morality, then everybody should just kill themselves in order to be the most good. The most good.

I think it is implied that sacrifice has to come with a purpose.

Communism is becoming a slave to the community. It also isn't a moral system, it's a political system. Also, it's not for the benefit of everybody, but for the benefit of the weak. "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need."

Politics is the morality of laws. Someone important said this. I forget who.

People don't go to war to make sacrifices. They go to war to survive, to conquer, to enforce their values on others, and to sack.

I guess it would depend on how you view the war; however, regardless of how it is viewed, the Soldier is dying for his community.

That isn't what capitalism is, but whatever. Is it better to enforce a poor or weak system of morality than to allow people the freedom to be strong?
You said that morality can't exist without the freedom to make your own choices, but you are saying that capitalism is immoral because it lets people make their own choices instead of forcing people to make pre-approved choices?

Capitalism is an amoral system, but in a sense it is what enables people to act morally by giving them choice in the matter.

Communism is a morally superior doctrine but... It cannot actually be morally superior because it takes away the choice of the individual.

Excellent kantian argument. The problem is, those who are "Weak" are usually capable of being strong. Even some of the weakest men can pick up a gun and shoot their enemies, or keep their money instead of giving it to a charity. Remember in the bible when the poor woman donates money, even though its almost everything she has, its considered strength because of how weak she actually is. She is sacrificing more of her strength than a rich man. What is this.. uhhh utility.. exchange... ill remember the name.. marginal utility exchange.

You are right, by and large; they are then strong in spirit and courageous people as normally others are unwilling to do this.

by a similar principle weak people have the most to gain by picking up a gun, but they don't. Thus, a bigger sacrifice.
shrugamcshrug

If people only sacrifice to be higher than other people, then they are just being vain.

You are correct -- the intent of a moral act should be to do something right for right's sake and not to achieve recognition.

so how does this all fit into shaving your head and listening to crappy angry music?


because that's what's really important

Well, yeah.

I guess if you shave your head and listen to angry music... You get closer to the entire romance of militarism and self-sacrifice.

[kahljorn]

I think it is implied that sacrifice has to come with a purpose

There is a purpose. To eliminate all human suffering once and for all. :)

more later.

[Dixie]

There is a purpose. To eliminate all human suffering once and for all.
Don't worry 'bout that part lil buddy.
We'll go extinct (hopefully) soon enough and there'll be no more human suffering.

[kahljorn]

Communism is a morally superior doctrine but... It cannot actually be morally superior because it takes away the choice of the individual. How is it a morally superior doctrine? This is a self-contradictory statement ;/
Anyway, communism rejoices in the weak and "feminine." The entire point of communism is so that the weak and feminine can survive just as easily as the strong. In fact, what it says is that the weak, feminine, strong and masculine are all equal in value. And it also argues that the weak and the feminine deserve more money/benefits than the strong and masculine.

Something can't be a morally superior doctrine just because it sounds nicer ;\

[Evil Robot]

GIVE UP YOUR LIFE FOR OUR DEAR LEADER, KIM JONG IL

[Dr. Boogie]

I have lived in Asia for 3 years and some change, by the way.... In Korea......

Well there you go: Kulturkampf in Korea. KKK.

[kahljorn]

The feminine is bad to be mixed with the masculine, I guess.

You guess? The feminine is not bad to be mixed with the masculine, I guess. And nobody is purely "masculine" or "feminine".

[kahljorn]

Don't worry 'bout that part lil buddy.
I'm not your lil buddy, champ.

[Dixie]

Too late.

Lil Buddy.

[VaporTrailx1]

Wow. Sort of like a Hyper-Libertarian Naturalism thing going on.
I like it : )

It would sort of be like that movie The Postman, but not gay.

[Dimnos]

I was going to start into this but it looks like Kahl has beat me to the punch again. Yea! Less work for me!

[Big Papa Goat]

woops, typo

[kahljorn]

Well, you can be my lil hussy then, since you're already everybody else's.

lil hussy.

[Dixie]

"Hussy" comes from the word "housewife", so I'd imagine that'd be an accurate description.

[kahljorn]

And ****** comes from negro which is the mexican word for black so I guess its not a big deal to call black people ******s.

Genetic fallacy :rolleyes

If y ou look in the dictionary it says that that definition is obsolete. Words change, whore. Hey look in the definition of WHORE part of its roots is, "To caress, to charish." OR CHARITY. Guess its not such a bad thing to call you a whore, it just means you like to donate money. That's very kind of you.

you are such a benevolent lil whore.

[Dixie]

I don't donate money.
I'm stingy.
:(

[Dixie]

You seem angry about something.

[kahljorn]

perceived pretension, mostly. and its not so much anger as annoyance.

[Dixie]

I think you misread me.
I use really stupid terms of endearment, but I mean them.
I when I talk I call people "honey" and "sugar" and "sweetie", none of which are meant in any derogatory or insulting way.
But now that you pitched a bitch fit over my calling you my little buddy, you're not my little buddy anymore, guy.

[kahljorn]

I never was your little buddy. What the fuck, we've talked like twice.

And I can't imagine calling someone, "Lil buddy" without being pretentious. But if I actually MISREAD you IM SORRY. Maybe you should be more careful not to call people by pretentious sounding names.

[Dixie]

I'm a southern pot head, dude.
duhhh

[kahljorn]

alright ;o

[kahljorn]

I guess it would depend on how you view the war; however, regardless of how it is viewed, the Soldier is dying for his community.Oh and this:
Depends on the soldier. Lots of soldiers are enlisted forcefully (draft). If they don't have a choice in the matter, how can it be a sacrifice -- or moral?
Many soldiers also join the military to get money, to travel and to get their college paid for. When was the last time somebody went to a military recruiter and come home saying, "I get the chance to die for my community" and not, "I'm gonna get a five thousand dollar incentive and all of these monetary advantages for bleh. Excellent retirement plan, too."
A lot of people also join the military because they don't know what to do with their life, or because they have no where to go. ;o or because they think its SO COOL AND MAKES THEM BETTER THAN OTHER PEOPLE. I WANNA TRAVEL. etcetera

Most people don't make sacrifices, they make exchanges. I'm not even sure there is such a thing as a "Sacrifice." Being somebody who sacrifices makes you a whore. I mean charitable. And that makes you MORE MORAL and clearly superior to other people.

[Kulturkampf]

Well there you go: Kulturkampf in Korea. KKK.

Nice.

You guess? The feminine is not bad to be mixed with the masculine, I guess. And nobody is purely "masculine" or "feminine".

That is true enough but there are certainly people who favor one over the other.

Wow. Sort of like a Hyper-Libertarian Naturalism thing going on.
I like it : )

It would sort of be like that movie The Postman, but not gay.

Right on, right on; totally not gay.

woops, typo

nice.

[Kulturkampf]

There is a purpose. To eliminate all human suffering once and for all. :)

more later.

Not bad. I can wait.

Don't worry 'bout that part lil buddy.
We'll go extinct (hopefully) soon enough and there'll be no more human suffering.

Oh wow humanity is not so coolto you.

How is it a morally superior doctrine? This is a self-contradictory statement ;/
Anyway, communism rejoices in the weak and "feminine." The entire point of communism is so that the weak and feminine can survive just as easily as the strong. In fact, what it says is that the weak, feminine, strong and masculine are all equal in value. And it also argues that the weak and the feminine deserve more money/benefits than the strong and masculine.

Something can't be a morally superior doctrine just because it sounds nicer ;\

There is nothing wrong with trying to protect the weak; the only moral crime is the choice to be weak and to not fight for what is right.


GIVE UP YOUR LIFE FOR OUR DEAR LEADER, KIM JONG IL

Cool.

Well, you can be my lil hussy then, since you're already everybody else's.

lil hussy.

Yeah, Kahl, let's fuck this girl with great masculinity; high fives; a little bit of the 'seks grupowy' as the Polish say.

Oh and this:
Depends on the soldier. Lots of soldiers are enlisted forcefully (draft). If they don't have a choice in the matter, how can it be a sacrifice -- or moral?
Many soldiers also join the military to get money, to travel and to get their college paid for. When was the last time somebody went to a military recruiter and come home saying, "I get the chance to die for my community" and not, "I'm gonna get a five thousand dollar incentive and all of these monetary advantages for bleh. Excellent retirement plan, too."
A lot of people also join the military because they don't know what to do with their life, or because they have no where to go. ;o or because they think its SO COOL AND MAKES THEM BETTER THAN OTHER PEOPLE. I WANNA TRAVEL. etcetera

Most people don't make sacrifices, they make exchanges. I'm not even sure there is such a thing as a "Sacrifice." Being somebody who sacrifices makes you a whore. I mean charitable. And that makes you MORE MORAL and clearly superior to other people.

Of course Soldiers receive benefits witht heir job. The goal is not to deprive oneself and attain a purely altruistic existence, but at the end of the day the risk of this sacrifice is a big deal.

Perhaps some do this purely out of self interest and others are pressed into the service but I do not think that this takes away the full dignity of it by any means.

[10,000 Volt Ghost]

Can you guys just paraphrase instead?

[Kulturkampf]

Can you guys just paraphrase instead?

What do you mean, champ?

[10,000 Volt Ghost]

I'm at work so I didn't get a chance to read the entire length of the conversation/post. I'll have to wait until I get home to comment better on the situation.

[kahljorn]

There is nothing wrong with trying to protect the weak; the only moral crime is the choice to be weak and to not fight for what is right.

Communism encourages people to be weak. I mean, the weak do not become any stronger and they are not encouraged to do so. In a sense, its actually less beneficial because then you will receive less benefits from the government. Communism also discourages people from, "Fighting for what's right" because what's right is already what's instituted. It's a totalitarian government system.
And its not a matter of protecting the weak, its a matter of taking things from those who have made the choice not to be weak so that the weak will be what? Not stronger. Besides that communism is self-contradictory. Part of the point is not to be alienated from your work, yet communism proposes just that; to alienate the strong from the fruits of their labor.

*edit* and again, communism makes the strong and the weak equal in value. I don't see how that jives with your other ideas. Except as a hilarious joke.

Perhaps some do this purely out of self interest and others are pressed into the service but I do not think that this takes away the full dignity of it by any means.It's not a sacrifice if you are doing it to benefit yourself. Besides, there is higher chance of dying in houston texas if you're a black man than if you are a soldier in Iraq. I fail to see the sacrifice ;\ Most people who are soldiers never even go to war. How many times have you been shot at?

The goal is not to deprive oneself and attain a purely altruistic existence, but at the end of the day the risk of this sacrifice is a big deal.how is it a sacrifice if you aren't depriving yourself? That's not a sacrifice, its an exchange.

[kahljorn]

That is true enough but there are certainly people who favor one over the other.Why talk? You don't even take hardline stances on issues. You say things, then have no arguments to support things. You're only "GUESSING." Its all, "Maybies." That isn't a hardline stance.
According to your own ideas you are feminine and weak :lol

[Big Papa Goat]

Why isn't my Friday the 13th remake thread 2 pages long yet? It's way more interesting than this Hatebreed ethics seminar, and is only like 16 posts long and none of them are even very long.

ANSWER ME THAT WITH YOUR PRECIOUS PHILOSOPHY, KAHLICLES.

[executioneer]

because the politics board gets folks all riled up!

[Zhukov]

Wish I got in on this earlier.

[kahljorn]

ANSWER ME THAT WITH YOUR PRECIOUS PHILOSOPHY, KAHLICLES.

cause i like to look impressive and smart with all my philosophorizing :(

[kahljorn]

even though i dont think anybody has ever thought i was impressive or smart. Usually it is the exact opposite.

[VaporTrailx1]

Hardliners are fascist dogs.

[kahljorn]

Whatever they are, Kultur isn't one of them.

[VaporTrailx1]

BTW Bring back Orbitz and Blue Pepsi.

[ZeldaQueen]

"It's bad to mix feminine and masculine"? What, are those two qualities drinks now?

Honestly, that's stupid. I can think of plenty of people who have both feminine and masculine qualities and are fine people.

[ZeldaQueen]

How is it a morally superior doctrine? This is a self-contradictory statement ;/
Anyway, communism rejoices in the weak and "feminine." The entire point of communism is so that the weak and feminine can survive just as easily as the strong. In fact, what it says is that the weak, feminine, strong and masculine are all equal in value. And it also argues that the weak and the feminine deserve more money/benefits than the strong and masculine.

Something can't be a morally superior doctrine just because it sounds nicer ;\
First of all, exactly how do you justify grouping "weak" only with "feminine" and "strong" only with "masculine"? Don't you think there are weak masculine people or strong feminine people? Strength comes in many forms you know.

Second of all, no communism is not superior. It's not a bad thing, it just would never work. It's based on the idea that every single person in a nation will do their share of work for the benefit of others. Ideally, if every single person did this, every single person would be covered (you would be covering everyone else, and you'd be covered by everyone else). Unfortunately, the concept is thrown down the toilet if even one person decides to not do their share. Since it's impossible to expect an entire nation to pull their weight for someone else, then it's impossible for actual Communism (the way it was meant to be) to work.

[Zhukov]

OK, communism.

Communism is not a political state, or a moral code, or a nation. It is a lack thereof. Communism is a stateless society. You are not forced to help everyone else, you are not forced to work for the good of society.

It's a higher form of society where everyone can do whatever the hell they want. People work because work is liberating. You help people out because you want to. It's not something we have seen, or will see in our lifetimes. It's 'Utopian', and it's not achievable with the world's current socio-economic layout. It's not a government, it's a way people live with each other and how they treat them. It's a world where class does not exist.

It's not the USSR, it's not Cuba, it's certainly not North Korea. It's the whole world or it's nothing. It's something to build towards, and maybe achieve in the future. It's not something that can happen in a year, two years, or a decade.

It's still something that I think will eventually happen, and if it doesn't then the world is screwed.

[Kulturkampf]

Why talk? You don't even take hardline stances on issues. You say things, then have no arguments to support things. You're only "GUESSING." Its all, "Maybies." That isn't a hardline stance.
According to your own ideas you are feminine and weak :lol

Well, I don't know.

I would take hardline stances but I have found that... That isn't really my goal, to force people to do things that they do not want to do. It isn't my concern. I have an opinion of them, though, and an opinion on a lot of things.

But individuals do not matter that much.

There will always be people who embrace some incorrect things... And that's normal, natural, etc. there will always be weakness. It is inherent to some people. It is inherent perhaps to most people. We all have weak aspects.

I just kind of want to see modern pop culture and civilization destroyed through whatever means necessary.

I would like to see more people buck the system, kick it into the ground; I would like to see the notion of the Collective fail.

My goal is to make you think and consider.

If you make any move towards being yourself on a better level, and being more independent of mainstream thought, I have succeeded.

If you do this without me you are like me, and you are your own success, and I love you.

I think we need to join forces and stand against what has become of our society.

Look, take some steps to explore your inner self on a huge level, and 'fuck' everything that is adhering to a normal standard.

We're a team.

"It's bad to mix feminine and masculine"? What, are those two qualities drinks now?

Honestly, that's stupid. I can think of plenty of people who have both feminine and masculine qualities and are fine people.

I do not know that many who do it on significant levels.

[Kulturkampf]

I also dislike communism.

Why isn't my Friday the 13th remake thread 2 pages long yet? It's way more interesting than this Hatebreed ethics seminar, and is only like 16 posts long and none of them are even very long.

ANSWER ME THAT WITH YOUR PRECIOUS PHILOSOPHY, KAHLICLES.

Hatebreed ethics seminar made me LOL.

Wish I got in on this earlier.

I know the feeling...

I have had these feelings aboutyour mom LOL.

[Tadao]

I do not know that many who do it on significant levels.

Maybe because no one actually like to be around you.

[kahljorn]

That's funny, because to me, you are pop culture. Every stupid asshole thinks like you do -- and they think it makes them special.

All you just did is admit that everything you write about is bullshit. You say people embrace "incorrect" things, but by what method do you deem them incorrect? Your philosophy isn't even stern enough to know the difference between right and wrong.

[kahljorn]

:rolleyes

[ZeldaQueen]

It's not the USSR, it's not Cuba, it's certainly not North Korea.

True dat. True dat.

[ZeldaQueen]

I do not know that many who do it on significant levels.
Okay, first of all, what kind of qualities do you consider to be feminine and masculine? Is femininity being emotional? Is masculinity being the "stiff upper lip" type? What is your definition of those terms?

Second of all, what are "significant levels"? How many are "that many"? You admit that you do know at least several people who are like that? Don't make so many sweeping generalizations about people. People are all different. You try to make universal rules like that and it comes off as a bit arrogant and rude.

[Kulturkampf]

Maybe because no one actually like to be around you.

I have more friends than you do.

I bet I could find 100 people to say "Kulturkampf is a man I want at my party; he is a man of honor and great esteem."

I have heard reviews calling me 'King' and 'Demigod' before.

And I play in a thrash metal band. And I sleep with different girls whenever I want to. My current squeeze is taking it slow because she knows the danger of being with a man of such incredible history.

I am one of the only men who cured himself of yellow fever through constant vaginal consumption.

That's funny, because to me, you are pop culture. Every stupid asshole thinks like you do -- and they think it makes them special.

All you just did is admit that everything you write about is bullshit. You say people embrace "incorrect" things, but by what method do you deem them incorrect? Your philosophy isn't even stern enough to know the difference between right and wrong.

Well, it is good that you think I am an asshole.

Over the next few months you may learn a thing or two about my ideology.

I just have backed away from stupid discussions -- there is no point in getting hung up on a lot of this.

The big idea si destroying current civilization. The details come later, and you choose them y ourself, because there is no need to force an ideology on anyone, is there?

But I willt ell you about my ideology.

Okay, first of all, what kind of qualities do you consider to be feminine and masculine? Is femininity being emotional? Is masculinity being the "stiff upper lip" type? What is your definition of those terms?

Second of all, what are "significant levels"? How many are "that many"? You admit that you do know at least several people who are like that? Don't make so many sweeping generalizations about people. People are all different. You try to make universal rules like that and it comes off as a bit arrogant and rude.

First, yeah, that is generally a good description.

My definition of these terms? Well, girls are more likely to take things personally and the wrong way; girls are more likely to be overly upset about certain things. Guys are more likely to get punchy over similar things or to ignore them. Guys make better friends when they are close and honest, very intimate, and knowledgable of you; they have the power to overlook a lot.

Girls make better friends when you let them do the talking and yuo do the accepting. It is very hard to get along with a lot of women unless you establish a clear barrier over a period of months and then speak to them on some of the issues near and dear to you.

I can tell a guy friend of a few weeks offensive things he disagrees with and he just chuckles and notes that he disagrees. Tell this to a woman who isn't ready and it becomes a dilemma.

Is that enough?

Next, yes, I have met some effeminate men who combine both. And some butch women. I am currently friends with a few guys like this, and one girl who is like this; and it is fine. It's who they are. They are unique indivdiuals.

The issue is when the average teenage boy thinks he needs to wear girl clothes and cry to be special.

[Kulturkampf]

Communism can never exist because man is fundamentally self-centered to his core, and more than that, he wants comfort.

Man also desires separation frm others and to only be punished for his own actions and not those of a neighbor.

If there is an error somewhere else and he has to suffer with the rest of the masses for a silly economic mistake made in Beijing, he isn't going to be happy to part with his comforts because of bureaucratic mishaps. Especially when the guys in Beijing are living life nicely and being recognized throughout the nation, receiving such props that he hath not.

[Tadao]

I have more friends than you do.

I bet I could find 100 people to say "Kulturkampf is a man I want at my party; he is a man of honor and great esteem."

I have heard reviews calling me 'King' and 'Demigod' before.

And I play in a thrash metal band. And I sleep with different girls whenever I want to. My current squeeze is taking it slow because she knows the danger of being with a man of such incredible history.

I am one of the only men who cured himself of yellow fever through constant vaginal consumption.


Yeah, I knew you were full of shit, now it's just disgustingly sad how pathetic you are.

[Kulturkampf]

This is a valid question.

In the 21st century there are still nations which routinely execute homosexuals and essentially bar atheists/agnostics from speaking out against religion. They are predominantly located in the Middle East.

Women are treated as cattle.

Even European politicians have been attacked by these people -- movements by Islamic countries have even put embargoes on certain European countries and products, and there is a stark movement to curtail freedom to criticize Islam in European nations that is somehow being acknowledged by the cowards they call European politicians.

Yes, Christians have done unchristian things but if you look at the nations with a Christian heritage today you will find that they are the freest nations on Earth.

If you look at predominantly atheist nations, such as China, Japan, North Korea, etc. you will find that there the homosexuals are criticized as well and even pornography is banned in China. They enforce much more strict, Victorian morals than the Christian states.

With a few exceptions, Christians in general have proven that they have no desire to enforce their morals on people collectively. Even though atheists enjoy pretending that school board debates in Kansas are hailing a new dawn of Christian crusades, this superstition is generally ridiculous.

Why isn't Islam the target of more criticism -- especially since there is a dramatic increase of Muslims in Western nations?

Islam epitomizes everything that you accuse Christianity of doing... But it is overlooked.

I just have to say... I want to be left alone and not accused of trying to curb your freedoms.

And I also want to see some other rational critics of Islam.

If anybody needs a dose of atheist tongue-lashing, it isn't the Christians.

Christians today spend most of their time on a horrible campaign to clarify their stances on things and separate themselves from the small, vocal minority that are largely disenfranchised, rural people only given microphones to discredit the majority of us.

If you want to lash out at actual violence, actual hatred, actual Old Testament-style values, Christianity should just be a small sideshow.

Let's see what you have to say about the Main Act.

[Kulturkampf]

Yeah, I knew you were full of shit, now it's just disgustingly sad how pathetic you are.

I should clandestinely record my fuckings over the next month or so and send you a video, and during each session at some point yell "Tadao... Tadao!" to validate it.

But that would be dishonest.

I would like to do this just to prove you wrong, but at the same point, I see no reason to degrade perfectly good people to prove an internet prick he's full of shit.

I have more bitches than a goddamn dog pound.

[Dr. Boogie]

I have more friends than you do.

I bet I could find 100 people to say "Kulturkampf is a man I want at my party; he is a man of honor and great esteem."

I have heard reviews calling me 'King' and 'Demigod' before.

And I play in a thrash metal band. And I sleep with different girls whenever I want to. My current squeeze is taking it slow because she knows the danger of being with a man of such incredible history.

I am one of the only men who cured himself of yellow fever through constant vaginal consumption.

Citation needed.


Anyway, you said the whole point of your posts is to convert people to your philosophy. Don't you think you're doing yourself a disservice by not putting any effort into this? Don't you think you could convert more people if you could back up the things you believe in?

[Tadao]

Wow, you're a psychotic with an imaginary lifestyle and delusions of grander. That's really original.

[Dr. Boogie]

I would like to do this just to prove you wrong, but at the same point, I see no reason to degrade perfectly good people to prove an internet prick he's full of shit.

I have more bitches than a goddamn dog pound.

So all those bitches are perfectly good people, or are there some bitches whom you don't respect enough that you can use to spite Tadao?

[Kulturkampf]

Citation needed.


Anyway, you said the whole point of your posts is to convert people to your philosophy. Don't you think you're doing yourself a disservice by not putting any effort into this? Don't you think you could convert more people if you could back up the things you believe in?

It is not really my philosophy and any credit I receive can only come from the physical, real efforts I put into it when I start publishing these.

I do not even care if youd o somethign entirely out of sync with me, independently, but I would like to see you do something.

I have no need to prop up a cult of personality on the fucking internet.

Wow, you're a psychotic with an imaginary lifestyle and delusions of grander. That's really original.

I am not psychotic and I am not imaginary; I also think I am going to fail, but it is easy to do these things and have fun doing them, which is what is good.

The journey is the reward.

So all those bitches are perfectly good people, or are there some bitches whom you don't respect enough that you can use to spite Tadao?

lol,

well, most of my current women I all respect and have esteem for. You only have to milk a few cows right a few times to keep drinking their milk; and as they come and go I replace them. The numbers are only impressive if we choose to admire the greater history.

They are people, like me, and they do what I do; we drink together, laugh together, play together, etc. It's not so superficial. It's humans in a foreign land reaching out for connections and warmth in the best days of their youth.

[Dr. Boogie]

It is not really my philosophy and any credit I receive can only come from the physical, real efforts I put into it when I start publishing these.

I do not even care if youd o somethign entirely out of sync with me, independently, but I would like to see you do something.

Ugh. Ok, let's try this again: you said that you want to encourage people to think and consider things, and you do this by typing up long posts about the stuff you believe.

Do you want people to debate the things you believe with you, because it seems like you don't since you don't provide any support for the claims you make?

well, most of my current women I all respect and have esteem for. You only have to milk a few cows right a few times to keep drinking their milk; and as they come and go I replace them. The numbers are only impressive if we choose to admire the greater history.

They are people, like me, and they do what I do; we drink together, laugh together, play together, etc. It's not so superficial. It's humans in a foreign land reaching out for connections and warmth in the best days of their youth.

Ok ok, so of all the bitches and cows you associate with on a non-superficial level, which ones would you use to spite Tadao? Would you say, "the ugly ones", because that would be really masculine!

[pac-man]

Christians are the most annoying.

[Dr. Boogie]

Jews have deli's, and deli's make Black and Whites. They taste great, and they're a great symbol of racial unity.

[Jeanette X]

Christianity is the main target because we live in a predominantly Christian society. If atheism or Islam were dominant, then they would get more venom.

With a few exceptions, Christians in general have proven that they have no desire to enforce their morals on people collectively.
Then why is gay marriage is now illegal in California? Why did the Mormon church spend millions of dollars trying to get Prop 8 passed?

[Dr. Boogie]

Then why is gay marriage is now illegal in California?

When we went to vote, we had to choose between legalizing medical marijuana, or gay marriage. We couldn't have both.:(

[Kulturkampf]

Ugh. Ok, let's try this again: you said that you want to encourage people to think and consider things, and you do this by typing up long posts about the stuff you believe.

Do you want people to debate the things you believe with you, because it seems like you don't since you don't provide any support for the claims you make?

Yeah, but people do not attack the essence of what I am posting and instead split hairs.

It doesn't matter that much to me unless we are actively criticizing the power structure as it stands.

If something is natural to someone I want to put them in an environment for them to achieve it to the utmost, without an overbearing government telling them they can't.

I support libertarianism for today's age.


Ok ok, so of all the bitches and cows you associate with on a non-superficial level, which ones would you use to spite Tadao? Would you say, "the ugly ones", because that would be really masculine!

Haha, I have not slept with a girl that would be deemed ugly since my last Birthday when there was nothing left at seven AM.

[Kulturkampf]

we shold legalize marijuana and gay marriage, and I dislike Mormonism. It is utterly ridiculous.

Christianity's last bastion is 'gay marriage,' and that has already ended in several states, including one point in california. Surely you see the absurdity of criticizing Christianity when the majority of Christians seem to not care that much about gay marriage and they rely on a ridiculous, cult-like sect to raise money.

I criticize the power structure which only includes such watered down, superficial Christians that it is merely playing to the lowest common denominator.

Obama the "Christian" invites gay Bishops to his inauguration parties... The Bible is pretty clear on its stance concerning homosexuality. If I were a Christian, I would call Obama out on this.

He's a hypocrite and an idiot playing the organ for the dumb masses happy to be spoonfed; and he played it well, appealing to intellectuals through his blackness and general liberalism; appealing to the ignorant by talking about jobs and straddling the fence just enough to convince them "he's a good guy, a Christian!"

[pac-man]

Why shouldn't Christianity be the "main target" of atheist derision? And what makes LDS more ridiculous than anything else?

[Jeanette X]

Surely you see the absurdity of criticizing Christianity when the majority of Christians seem to not care that much about gay marriage and they rely on a ridiculous, cult-like sect to raise money.
So the Mormon's aren't true Christians? A fine example of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_scotsman

Obama the "Christian" invites gay Bishops to his inauguration parties... The Bible is pretty clear on its stance concerning homosexuality. If I were a Christian, I would call Obama out on this.


So you can't be a Christian unless you follow your narrow interpretation of the Bible? Tell me, do you also regard self-identified Christians as hypocrites if they don't keep kosher?

[ZeldaQueen]

First, yeah, that is generally a good description.

My definition of these terms? Well, girls are more likely to take things personally and the wrong way; girls are more likely to be overly upset about certain things. Guys are more likely to get punchy over similar things or to ignore them. Guys make better friends when they are close and honest, very intimate, and knowledgable of you; they have the power to overlook a lot.

Girls make better friends when you let them do the talking and yuo do the accepting. It is very hard to get along with a lot of women unless you establish a clear barrier over a period of months and then speak to them on some of the issues near and dear to you.

I can tell a guy friend of a few weeks offensive things he disagrees with and he just chuckles and notes that he disagrees. Tell this to a woman who isn't ready and it becomes a dilemma.

Is that enough?

Next, yes, I have met some effeminate men who combine both. And some butch women. I am currently friends with a few guys like this, and one girl who is like this; and it is fine. It's who they are. They are unique indivdiuals.

The issue is when the average teenage boy thinks he needs to wear girl clothes and cry to be special.

But the question is, what is "average"? People's roles in society have changed drastically. If you tell someone something offensive, I can guarantee you that girls and guys will get upset by it.

What is "girl" clothes? Girls wear clothes that were once considered "guy" clothes. Why can't guys do the same? It's only cloth and really the purpose of clothes is to keep us warm.

People don't necessarily act certain ways to "be special". If a guy cries, chances are he's doing it because of the way he is emotionally and not because he thinks "Oh, this'll make me unique! Look at me!"

Basically from what you've said, I've gotten that you think that girls misinterpret things, get fussy, and need to do the talking while you smile and nod. I also got that you think that guys either are not as emotional or react physically when upset.

If that's not what you meant, sorry. But that seems to me to be a pretty sweeping generalization of both genders. You mention that you have friends of both genders who break this mold and that you don't mind as it makes them unique. Fine, but then you say that it's an "issue" when teenage boys act "effeminate". Every person's unique. You said so yourself! So what's the difference?

I just hate it when people make sweeping generalizations about groups of people.

[pac-man]

It's not even that complicated. Christians are the most annoying to non-Christians.

[ZeldaQueen]

The reason Christianity is picked on is because it's one of the largest religions in the world. It's like how whenever a huge craze comes up (Pokemon, D&D, etc), there are people who make fun of it and people who complain how it's harmful, useless, ruining the youth, etc.

If something's so big, of course there's going to be criticism. You can't expect something to be universally popular.

No religions should be the object of ridicule or scorn in my opinion. It's the people in the religion who do the stuff we pick on, not the religion itself.

[Dr. Boogie]

Yeah, but people do not attack the essence of what I am posting and instead split hairs.

It doesn't matter that much to me unless we are actively criticizing the power structure as it stands.

Ah, so you don't want people discussing your philosophy. You just want people to start questioning the power structure, whatever that means.

If something is natural to someone I want to put them in an environment for them to achieve it to the utmost, without an overbearing government telling them they can't.

They have people who do that for a living. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_agency)

Haha, I have not slept with a girl that would be deemed ugly since my last Birthday when there was nothing left at seven AM.

Well there you go. If you were going to one-up that nefarious cad, Tadao, you would use the girl you settled with because you had to sleep with someone.

[Dr. Boogie]

Christianity's last bastion is 'gay marriage,' and that has already ended in several states, including one point in california. Surely you see the absurdity of criticizing Christianity when the majority of Christians seem to not care that much about gay marriage and they rely on a ridiculous, cult-like sect to raise money.

Obama the "Christian" invites gay Bishops to his inauguration parties... The Bible is pretty clear on its stance concerning homosexuality. If I were a Christian, I would call Obama out on this.

Why would you want christians to call him on it? You just said that most of them don't care that much about gay marriage.

It sounds like you want them to have a problem with gay marriage. If that happened, it would provide an answer to the title of this thread.

[kahljorn]

usually people separate marxism and communism.

[kahljorn]

lol, splitting hairs.

I like how if you attack his philosophy you are just splitting hairs. YOU HAVENT ATTACKED THE ESSSSEEENCE.

The big idea si destroying current civilization.

Soooo original ;\

[executioneer]

the first rule of kulturkampf is you do not talk about kulturkampf :lol

[Kulturkampf]

Why shouldn't Christianity be the "main target" of atheist derision? And what makes LDS more ridiculous than anything else?

I do not think that it should have to be explained why LDS is ridiculous. Do a small amount of research and if you disagree with me I will laugh at you.

Christianity should not be the main target because Islam is far more sick and laughable.

So the Mormon's aren't true Christians? A fine example of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_scotsman


So you can't be a Christian unless you follow your narrow interpretation of the Bible? Tell me, do you also regard self-identified Christians as hypocrites if they don't keep kosher?

Well, you know that dietary laws were pretty much overturned by Christ, don't you?

And you know that Mormons follow a secondary book that is absurd, don't you?

I am not one to judge the measure of Christianity but I am also not the one who is going to include strange, polygamist cults as Christian.

It's not even that complicated. Christians are the most annoying to non-Christians.

And what are Muslims?

The reason Christianity is picked on is because it's one of the largest religions in the world. It's like how whenever a huge craze comes up (Pokemon, D&D, etc), there are people who make fun of it and people who complain how it's harmful, useless, ruining the youth, etc.

If something's so big, of course there's going to be criticism. You can't expect something to be universally popular.

No religions should be the object of ridicule or scorn in my opinion. It's the people in the religion who do the stuff we pick on, not the religion itself.

Islam is about as big as Christianity, as I remember.

Your last statement is generally fair, by the way.

Why would you want christians to call him on it? You just said that most of them don't care that much about gay marriage.

It sounds like you want them to have a problem with gay marriage. If that happened, it would provide an answer to the title of this thread.

I want people to call him onit because I hate the way politicians pose for religion, and more than that, I hate Barack Obama and the DNC; I strongly dislike all of the Republicans as well.

I think these people should have no power -- let alone power over our goddamned economy.

[Kulturkampf]

But the question is, what is "average"? People's roles in society have changed drastically. If you tell someone something offensive, I can guarantee you that girls and guys will get upset by it.

What is "girl" clothes? Girls wear clothes that were once considered "guy" clothes. Why can't guys do the same? It's only cloth and really the purpose of clothes is to keep us warm.

People don't necessarily act certain ways to "be special". If a guy cries, chances are he's doing it because of the way he is emotionally and not because he thinks "Oh, this'll make me unique! Look at me!"

Basically from what you've said, I've gotten that you think that girls misinterpret things, get fussy, and need to do the talking while you smile and nod. I also got that you think that guys either are not as emotional or react physically when upset.

If that's not what you meant, sorry. But that seems to me to be a pretty sweeping generalization of both genders. You mention that you have friends of both genders who break this mold and that you don't mind as it makes them unique. Fine, but then you say that it's an "issue" when teenage boys act "effeminate". Every person's unique. You said so yourself! So what's the difference?

I just hate it when people make sweeping generalizations about groups of people.

I base these conclusions off of what I envision normal behavior for men and women to be, which society seeks to change in two ways.

Look at the wikipedia article for the female brain and the male brain compared -- chemicals are different in these two which actualize different feelings and reactions to things.

Males have inherently different base than females -- it's science.

The notion that women should pursue careers over family orientated goals and be looked down upon for not doing so is absurd; the notion that men should behave like women, be more moderated in their behavior and emasculated is what I oppose.

Individuals will always be different but we are seeing generations of people enslaved to a cultural concept that is equally as ridiculous as that of the 1950s that acted as if women were incapable of performing jobs as well as mine.

Ah, so you don't want people discussing your philosophy. You just want people to start questioning the power structure, whatever that means.



They have people who do that for a living. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_agency)



Well there you go. If you were going to one-up that nefarious cad, Tadao, you would use the girl you settled with because you had to sleep with someone.

Well, discuss the philosophy and re-interpret it, do whatever you want; I just think the heirarchy of the world today needs to be destroyed and we need to end the current hegemony of pop culture. We need to end the way that the education system indoctrinates kids into a culture of meaninglessness and sensitivity.

We need to end the government's roles within our lives.

Do you agree with any of this?

lol, splitting hairs.

I like how if you attack his philosophy you are just splitting hairs. YOU HAVENT ATTACKED THE ESSSSEEENCE.



Soooo original ;\

Hey now, Kahl, it is splitting hairs.

I do not believe in forcing roles down anyones throats but I feel that the current system is forcing roles as it stands.

[Kulturkampf]

usually people separate marxism and communism.

When I was young and into Communism we'd ask each other what kind of Communist the other was.

Marxist-Leninist... Trotskyist... Maoist... etc.

It was generally a cute time for everyone.

[Dr. Boogie]

Look at the wikipedia article for the female brain and the male brain compared -- chemicals are different in these two which actualize different feelings and reactions to things.

Males have inherently different base than females -- it's science.

http://roundisfunny.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/ron-burgundy-3717.jpg

"I'm a man who discovered the wheel and built the Eiffel Tower out of metal and brawn. That's what kind of man I am. You're just a woman with a small brain. With a brain a third the size of us. It's science. "


Well, discuss the philosophy and re-interpret it, do whatever you want; I just think the heirarchy of the world today needs to be destroyed and we need to end the current hegemony of pop culture. We need to end the way that the education system indoctrinates kids into a culture of meaninglessness and sensitivity.

We need to end the government's roles within our lives.

Do you agree with any of this?

It's hard to say. It's all so vague. I can't tell what you would like done, specifically, to end things like the "hegemony of pop culture" and the "culture of meaninglessness and sensitivity".

[executioneer]

dude we have to light buildings on fire int he shape of a smiley face havent you watched fight club

[MetalMilitia]

I think you'll find that a lot of people that are outspoken about atheism (Dawkins, Hitchins, etc.) say that all religions are bullshit, but pay special attention to Christianity because it has the most effect on their daily lives.
If Muslims tried to impose their beliefs on US/UK schools/politics/whatever you can bet that it would be shot down in two seconds (possibly not so in England but we're working on it). The fact that Christian values are taken so seriously in, for example, politics really annoys people because of the whole church/state separation thing.

There is also the fact that criticising Islam is far more likely to get you a letter bomb though the mail box, which may put some people off.

[Zhukov]

So you used to be into bureaucratic planning, but now you're not. Well done.

If the examples of Beijing or Stalin or whatever are going to be the base for what we call communism now, well I guess I'll deal with it. In this thread at any rate. Misguided, state owned, bureaucratic nonsense? No, it will never work, I'll agree with you, and leave you guys to it.

[ZeldaQueen]

That's what burns me up, when people think that what Stalin did was actually Communism. Stalin wasn't even supposed to have led the USSR. Lennin even asked for everyone to make sure that Trotsky took over next, not Stalin.

[ZeldaQueen]

Right. I really can't see how your whole "Islam isn't nearly as targeted" thing works when there're people after September 11th who have taken on the "only good Muslim is a dead Muslim" idea. Which, I think, is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are the only three religions in the world who worship one God (the rest are polythesitic). They started in the same area and have the same people in their religions.

[ZeldaQueen]

I base these conclusions off of what I envision normal behavior for men and women to be, which society seeks to change in two ways.

Look at the wikipedia article for the female brain and the male brain compared -- chemicals are different in these two which actualize different feelings and reactions to things.

Males have inherently different base than females -- it's science.

The notion that women should pursue careers over family orientated goals and be looked down upon for not doing so is absurd; the notion that men should behave like women, be more moderated in their behavior and emasculated is what I oppose.

Individuals will always be different but we are seeing generations of people enslaved to a cultural concept that is equally as ridiculous as that of the 1950s that acted as if women were incapable of performing jobs as well as mine.

So that's how you think genders are. Fair enough to a degree. Men and women do have different hormone and chemical balances. But that only accounts for so much.

There are plenty of women who think that they should concentrate on careers. There are just as many women who prefer to be stay-at-home moms who cook and clean while their husbands go to work. There are women who take care of kids while keeping a job. I don't feel that society insists that a woman put career ahead of everything else.

I also don't see any notion that men ought to behave "like women". I fail to see how being "moderated in behavior" is something wrong. Some men simply are more emotional or at least show it (just because a person doesn't cry outright doesn't mean they don't cry).

Another thing to consider is that people don't act "feminine" or "masculine" 24/7. There're girls who are on sports teams who also dress up and go to prom with their boyfriends. There're guys who are plenty tough but also are sensitive. My brother can be aggressive, but he also cries and is emotional. My cousin is funny and sensitive, but he also takes wrestling and once hit another guy who wouldn't stop bothering him. My best friend is all for equal rights for women, but she also dresses up for dances and goes out on dates.

I guess what I'm saying is that "feminine" and "masculine" aren't switches. A person isn't one or the other. Everyone is - and always has - had a blend of the traits you consider to fall into these categories. Simply because it's become culturally acceptable to show these traits doesn't mean it's just started happening.

[Evil Robot]

PENIS
http://www.hf.uib.no/religion/popularikonografi/bilder/19b.jpg

[Jeanette X]

Well, you know that dietary laws were pretty much overturned by Christ, don't you?

And you know that Mormons follow a secondary book that is absurd, don't you?

I am not one to judge the measure of Christianity but I am also not the one who is going to include strange, polygamist cults as Christian.


Who gives a shit? For someone who isn't a Christian, you certainly have your panties in a knot over who is and who isn't. And by the way, the mainstream LDS hasn't practiced polygamy in over 100 years, not that it contradicts the Bible to do so.

[Big Papa Goat]

you know, the hatebreed ethics seminar was about us lol'ing @ you, not w/ you.

Just so we're clear.

[kahljorn]

Communism is ridiculous precisely because its utopian and theoretically inevitable. It's pointless to even bring into a discussion.

[kahljorn]

Criticizing your philosophy is not SPLITTING HAIRS. It's philosophizing. Learn the difference, numb nuts.

Apparently you think you should be able to use any stupid reasoning to support your argument. IT DOESNT AFFECT THE ESSENCE. It does, actually.

[b_squared]

I just have a few simple things that I would like to see the good people of the world do:

(1) Reject tolerance for morality.
(2) Reject decency for dignity.
(3) Reject peace for war, "the world's only hygiene" (F. T. Marinetti)
(4) Reject control for liberty.
(5) Reject vanity for truth.
(6) Reject money for time.
(7) Reject intellectualism for simplicity in action.


Why does # 3 sound like cultural, ethnic, spirtual cleansing? Oh, but thats ok though right? After all we have #1, we have our morality. It will not tolerate anyone else's ideas of what's moral. We reject what is decient because to do so is dignified. We reject the control others force upon us to tolerate others decency because we have the liberty do so, and that makes it ok. People who are decent, and tolerant, and work to acheive peace are vain and untruthful. People should not get paid for their time. People should not enlighten themselfes with higher learning because the simpler you are the easier it is to believe in #1-7.

No thank you. I have the liberty to reject your morals, because I can see the truth behind them.

After reading to you explanations to support your thesis I can conclude that you have acheived only # 7. Number 6 is within reach though if you have time to post as often as you do.

[Kulturkampf]

"I'm a man who discovered the wheel and built the Eiffel Tower out of metal and brawn. That's what kind of man I am. You're just a woman with a small brain. With a brain a third the size of us. It's science. "

Yeah, that is what I was really getting at, right?

It's hard to say. It's all so vague. I can't tell what you would like done, specifically, to end things like the "hegemony of pop culture" and the "culture of meaninglessness and sensitivity".

I would like you to give up all of your preconceptions and criticize everything and actively criticize pop culture as a whole.

Eventually, I would like to see a wide enough base that it could be directed towards physical destruction of institutions and human lives.

So that's how you think genders are. Fair enough to a degree. Men and women do have different hormone and chemical balances. But that only accounts for so much.

There are plenty of women who think that they should concentrate on careers. There are just as many women who prefer to be stay-at-home moms who cook and clean while their husbands go to work. There are women who take care of kids while keeping a job. I don't feel that society insists that a woman put career ahead of everything else.

I also don't see any notion that men ought to behave "like women". I fail to see how being "moderated in behavior" is something wrong. Some men simply are more emotional or at least show it (just because a person doesn't cry outright doesn't mean they don't cry).

Another thing to consider is that people don't act "feminine" or "masculine" 24/7. There're girls who are on sports teams who also dress up and go to prom with their boyfriends. There're guys who are plenty tough but also are sensitive. My brother can be aggressive, but he also cries and is emotional. My cousin is funny and sensitive, but he also takes wrestling and once hit another guy who wouldn't stop bothering him. My best friend is all for equal rights for women, but she also dresses up for dances and goes out on dates.

I guess what I'm saying is that "feminine" and "masculine" aren't switches. A person isn't one or the other. Everyone is - and always has - had a blend of the traits you consider to fall into these categories. Simply because it's become culturally acceptable to show these traits doesn't mean it's just started happening.

I agree with your points and I think perhaps we disagree mostly just on emphasis.

What I would like to hear your opinion on concerns how you feel about the modern culture emasculating males...

Or do you think this doesn't happen?


Why does # 3 sound like cultural, ethnic, spirtual cleansing? Oh, but thats ok though right? After all we have #1, we have our morality. It will not tolerate anyone else's ideas of what's moral. We reject what is decient because to do so is dignified. We reject the control others force upon us to tolerate others decency because we have the liberty do so, and that makes it ok. People who are decent, and tolerant, and work to acheive peace are vain and untruthful. People should not get paid for their time. People should not enlighten themselfes with higher learning because the simpler you are the easier it is to believe in #1-7.

No thank you. I have the liberty to reject your morals, because I can see the truth behind them.

After reading to you explanations to support your thesis I can conclude that you have acheived only # 7. Number 6 is within reach though if you have time to post as often as you do.

There would be nothing ethnic about the cleansing, but to some extent it would be a cultural cleansing that focused on replacing it with liberty.

[Kulturkampf]

you know, the hatebreed ethics seminar was about us lol'ing @ you, not w/ you.

Just so we're clear.

You're a faggot with a stupid name.

Communism is ridiculous precisely because its utopian and theoretically inevitable. It's pointless to even bring into a discussion.

Yep.

[Kulturkampf]

Right. I really can't see how your whole "Islam isn't nearly as targeted" thing works when there're people after September 11th who have taken on the "only good Muslim is a dead Muslim" idea. Which, I think, is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are the only three religions in the world who worship one God (the rest are polythesitic). They started in the same area and have the same people in their religions.

I believe there is also a Vietnamese religion that is monotheist... Just to... Let you know...

I also think Sikhism is monotheist...

Who gives a shit? For someone who isn't a Christian, you certainly have your panties in a knot over who is and who isn't. And by the way, the mainstream LDS hasn't practiced polygamy in over 100 years, not that it contradicts the Bible to do so.

The New Testament doesn't support polygamy, so if we are talking about the Bible from a Christian standpoint, you should consider fucking off back to the Library for a refresher.

[Jeanette X]

I believe there is also a Vietnamese religion that is monotheist... Just to... Let you know...

I also think Sikhism is monotheist...



The New Testament doesn't support polygamy, so if we are talking about the Bible from a Christian standpoint, you should consider fucking off back to the Library for a refresher.

The OLD TESTAMENT supports it, you twatwaffle. Or is the Old Testament totally irrelevant to Christianity in your opinion?

[Kulturkampf]

The OLD TESTAMENT supports it, you twatwaffle. Or is the Old Testament totally irrelevant to Christianity in your opinion?

Anything Christ made irrelevant is certainly... Irrelevant.

Christ spoke of marriage as the union of a man and a woman; polygamy is a thing of the past in Christian belief and doctrine.

[ZeldaQueen]

I believe there is also a Vietnamese religion that is monotheist... Just to... Let you know...

I also think Sikhism is monotheist...
Technically Sikhism's more of a philosophy and has no definite concept of God (they define God as the Universe).

The Vietnamese religions are various forms of Buddhism (which has no "God" but the lifeforce of Nirvana, as Buddha is simply a man who first achieved enlightenment), with the later additions of Christianity (no explanation needed I hope), Islam (again, I said it was monotheistic), and Hinduism (which is very much polytheisitic).

You might be thinking of Confucianism or Daoism? Confucianism is not so much a religion as a way to live your life ethically, through various codes of conduct and the "gentlemanly arts". Daoism is a religion that calls for the respect of ancestors and the balance of nature and elements of our spirit (it's a bit difficult to explain). There is, as far as I know, no definite "God" image as it is more of a blend of religious views and philosophy than actual religion (this is where the concept of Ying and Yang come from).

If you remember what this religion you're thinking of is called, please tell me (I'm fascinated by religions, as you can probably tell).

[ZeldaQueen]

I agree with your points and I think perhaps we disagree mostly just on emphasis.

What I would like to hear your opinion on concerns how you feel about the modern culture emasculating males...

Or do you think this doesn't happen?
I'd say so. I do enjoy a good debate though. :)

Fair enough. I really don't notice "emasculation" so much as society saying "It's alright to step out of the mold". If it's one thing about feminism that does bother me, it's when it gets to the extreme of "We don't need any men at all! We must dominate!"

I realize, of course, that is at the very end of a spectrum, but my point is that if women are allowed to step out of their former society roles (June Cleaver or the pretty secretary/telephone operator) men ought to be allowed the same privillege should they desire it. That's the key. As I said before, there are women who want to build a career and women who want to be homemakers. That should be their decision. Either path has its own merits and neither is (to me) dishonorable.

It is the same with men. There are, I know, lots of men who would choose to go out and take a job and be the breadwinners. Or be athletes. Or something like that. And there are also men who would be happy staying at home and caring for their children. Or becoming art majors. It's who they are as a person.

Some women are, let's face it, just not the kind of person who ought to be a mother. Maybe it's because of emotional problems or difficulty committing to something like raising a child or just because she doesn't think she'd be ready for it. If that's the case, there's no reason why it should be expected of her. If she honestly is unable to settle to a "traditional" female life, she can, in this day and age, go for something else.

Same with men. Some men just are more suited for roles in society like being a stay-at-home dad. To me, there's nothing at all wrong with that. It's a worthwhile thing to do (it provides bonding between the child and the father).

Now out of curiosity, how do you see men as being "effeminised"? (If such a word exists... :\)

[kahljorn]

I bet KK throws up on his own penis and masturbates with the vomit.

[Dr. Boogie]

I would like you to give up all of your preconceptions and criticize everything and actively criticize pop culture as a whole.

My preconceptions of what? Ah, screw it. Lemme give this a shot:


Pop culture sure is lousy.


Ok, I've criticized pop culture as a whole. Now what?

Eventually, I would like to see a wide enough base that it could be directed towards physical destruction of institutions and human lives.


Which institutions? And don't say "institutions that _____". What specific existing institutions would you like to see rent asunder with physical violence? And who do you want to see physically destroyed?

[Kulturkampf]

found it, Zelda:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cao_Dai

It is interesting, and monotheist.

[Zhukov]

Haha, you were both arguing about it not too long ago, and both using it as an example to further your points of view.

[ZeldaQueen]

Ah, thank you! Looks like that's a newer one (my classes covered the older religions, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Shintoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, those ones), so that'd probably be why I missed it.

[kahljorn]

yea, but not the ideal perfect form which begs the question of whether it is ideal and perfect or even possible ;\.
Sorry to say, but people criticize communism for the reasons I listed all the fucking time. It removes incentives to work. It is totalitarian. But then for you to come into the thread and say, "Well communism is supposed to be perfect so you guys dont know what you';'re talking about." and, "Modern examples of communism aren't actual communism" is sheer bullshit. They are examples of communism, and people use it as criticisms of marxist theory.
BUT COMMUNISM IS SUPPOSED TO BE PERFECT. Well, the point of the criticisms people bring up is that IT CANT BE PERFECT. UT ITS SUPPOSED TO BE PERFECT SO IF YOU CRITICIZE COMMUNISM AND ITS NOT PERFECT COMMUNISM THEN ITS NOT COMMUNISM AND YOU ARENT CRITICIZING COMMUNISM.
:rolleyes

i dont think i ever used communism to further my point of view ;\

[Kulturkampf]

Yeah, I am not even sure how I came to know of this... I just remembered hearing about it once.

[kahljorn]

Somewhere in the world im sure there's another obscure religious sect that is monotheistic :rolleyes Reading about Cao Dai its extremely clear that its basically derived from buddhists which were converted to christianity and became an amalgam of many religions.

really it seems more like its pantheistic (panentheism? whatever) than monotheistic. *shrug* You could argue that hinduism is monotheistic, and some people do believe it is monotheistic. You could in a sense say the same about buddhism...

People talk shit on islam all the time. Except that, Islam has hella bigger issues. Their treatment of women, for example. Its crazy to even imagine somebody saying that people don't make a big deal out of Islam ;\
Most of the people I know consider islamic countries like third world countries or something. Maybe that's part of the reason: these countries are just seen as medieval. And really, their problems aren't really that relevant to our own. Although, we've made them ours, haven't we? We've been trying to democratize them for the last few years. Tons of people make a huge issue out of trying to make it less rigid over there. Again: there's just more important issues with these other countries. We couldn't even get started on "Gay rights." I mean, are there really "Rights" in the modern sense of the word in Islamic countries?
tyrrany is pretty much targetted world-wide, but what can we really do about chinese tyranny in america? Our arguments have no affect on it. Neither does our attention. Not only that, but their problems are irrelevant to our own, and we aren't going to advance our culture by focusing on their failures.

Also you're an idiot. Christianity isn't "The main target." It might be at the focal point for issues IN AMERICA about Gay rights (or god in the classroom or any numerous other religious issues), but that's because america is a predominantly christian nation. With a predominantly christian heritage. And most of the people pushing for no gay marriage (or other religious based ideas) are christian, not islamic. So why would they be targeted? What the fuck do we have to include every obscure religion which is against gay marriage into our condemnation -- even when its not relevant to the problem? Most people don't even know which religions are against it.

Also, most of the atheists in this country, and other christian nations, probably used to be christian. So they have angst. Not only that, but most people probably don't even know shit about islam other than that its where terrorists come from and they are medieval asshats. Also its usually christians that target the atheists (in america).

Also I'm pretty sure Islam is the largest religion in the world.

Yes, Christians have done unchristian things but if you look at the nations with a Christian heritage today you will find that they are the freest nations on Earth.Yea, and most of the reason why they are freest is because they move away from christian religious values.

you start the dumbest threads.

The fact that Christian values are taken so seriously in, for example, politics really annoys people because of the whole church/state separation thing.I think this pretty much sums it up. Less islamic/judaic people are trying to force their religious values down other people's throats. Christianity gets the limelight, simply because, in america, they are in the limelight. It all has to do with proximity.

[kahljorn]

Also gay marriage isnt the last bastion. What about abortion?

The other night i saw a huge anti-abortion gathering. They bought the building across the street from the abortion clinic and named it something like, "FAMILY PLANNING" or some shit and they entice people to come inside (not knowing its an anti-abortion place) and then they bombard them with anti-abortion pamphlets and pictures of aborted third trimester fetuses. They also harass women going in to have abortions.

the church across the street sets up crosses for ALL THE ABORTED BABIES. *shrug*

[VaporTrailx1]

The reason gay-marriage is such an issue is that it is sort of a turning point. Cause then polygamists would have ammo for their cause, then who knows what from there. There is but 1 solution to stop this. Abolish Marriage As A State Institution. Think about it, it makes sense. Call it the Domestic Mutually Assured Destruction policy.

Interesting fact : The Crusades only killed about 1.5 million people on each side. But many people believe it to be 45 million+ for some reason. The population of Europe wasn't even 35 million in 1300. However, the Black Plague cut that in half by 1450.

[kahljorn]

Kulturkamph is a woman I want at my gang bang; she is a woman of staunch bonors and grates a steed.

how's that for a review.

lol who the fuck gives reviews about people.

[kahljorn]

They should just let polygamists get married, too.

[Kulturkampf]

Somewhere in the world im sure there's another obscure religious sect that is monotheistic :rolleyes Reading about Cao Dai its extremely clear that its basically derived from buddhists which were converted to christianity and became an amalgam of many religions.

really it seems more like its pantheistic (panentheism? whatever) than monotheistic. *shrug* You could argue that hinduism is monotheistic, and some people do believe it is monotheistic. You could in a sense say the same about buddhism...

Yeah, I heard that and thought of mentioning monotheism for Hinduism. I once read some fo that Hare Krsna shit. It was OK.


Also you're an idiot. Christianity isn't "The main target." It might be at the focal point for issues IN AMERICA about Gay rights (or god in the classroom or any numerous other religious issues), but that's because america is a predominantly christian nation. With a predominantly christian heritage. And most of the people pushing for no gay marriage (or other religious based ideas) are christian, not islamic. So why would they be targeted? What the fuck do we have to include every obscure religion which is against gay marriage into our condemnation -- even when its not relevant to the problem? Most people don't even know which religions are against it.

Yeah, you're a fucking douche.

It is funny how you try to play this off.

You act like the world is only as big as the West.

you start the dumbest threads.

And you're a closed minded prick who has never ventured out of his fucking backyard, you fucking clown.

I am sorry I do not live in fucking douche-baggia who thinks it is an issue that Christians keep their dying campaigns going, represented by a vocal minority.

Christianity has been largely divorced from civil society for a long time... Why would it even be a target or even worth discussing?

The Muslims are already fucking shit up in Europe, bro. Do you live there? Or in America?

(and they've been fucking south Asia longer)

Also gay marriage isnt the last bastion. What about abortion?

The other night i saw a huge anti-abortion gathering. They bought the building across the street from the abortion clinic and named it something like, "FAMILY PLANNING" or some shit and they entice people to come inside (not knowing its an anti-abortion place) and then they bombard them with anti-abortion pamphlets and pictures of aborted third trimester fetuses. They also harass women going in to have abortions.

the church across the street sets up crosses for ALL THE ABORTED BABIES. *shrug*

So they have a fun time wasting their money.

The reason gay-marriage is such an issue is that it is sort of a turning point. Cause then polygamists would have ammo for their cause, then who knows what from there. There is but 1 solution to stop this. Abolish Marriage As A State Institution. Think about it, it makes sense. Call it the Domestic Mutually Assured Destruction policy.

Interesting fact : The Crusades only killed about 1.5 million people on each side. But many people believe it to be 45 million+ for some reason. The population of Europe wasn't even 35 million in 1300. However, the Black Plague cut that in half by 1450.

I agree with everythign said here.

You shoudl also add "abolish the majority of the government; deregulate everything; cut off Hollywood actor's heads and massacre MTV."

They should just let polygamists get married, too.

Yep.

[kahljorn]

You act like the world is only as big as the West.Yea? Is christianity a huge target of atheists and pro gay marriage folk :lol in non-western countries?

thinks it is an issue that Christians keep their dying campaigns going, represented by a vocal minority.Prop 8 was passed in california. Not much of a dying campaign. Bush got voted into office largely because everybody wanted a MORAL person in office.
Being christian is always a big issue during election times...

So they have a fun time wasting their money.You're the one who said it was their last bastion or whatever.


The Muslims are already fucking shit up in Europe, bro. Do you live there? Or in America?Do you? :lol

[Kulturkampf]

Kulturkamph is a woman I want at my gang bang; she is a woman of staunch bonors and grates a steed.

how's that for a review.

lol who the fuck gives reviews about people.

haha, yeah. :)

My preconceptions of what? Ah, screw it. Lemme give this a shot:


Pop culture sure is lousy.


Ok, I've criticized pop culture as a whole. Now what?



Which institutions? And don't say "institutions that _____". What specific existing institutions would you like to see rent asunder with physical violence? And who do you want to see physically destroyed?

I will think about this and get back to you..

Generally speaking, I would like to see any institutions which attempt to regulate personal freedom destroyed -- that is to say, the federal and state governments themselves who come up with things like smoking bands, red tape for establishing businesses, who criminalize fun, who regulate alcohol and drug use, etc.

I bet KK throws up on his own penis and masturbates with the vomit.

Now that is not quite right...

I'd say so. I do enjoy a good debate though. :)

Fair enough. I really don't notice "emasculation" so much as society saying "It's alright to step out of the mold". If it's one thing about feminism that does bother me, it's when it gets to the extreme of "We don't need any men at all! We must dominate!"

I realize, of course, that is at the very end of a spectrum, but my point is that if women are allowed to step out of their former society roles (June Cleaver or the pretty secretary/telephone operator) men ought to be allowed the same privillege should they desire it. That's the key. As I said before, there are women who want to build a career and women who want to be homemakers. That should be their decision. Either path has its own merits and neither is (to me) dishonorable.

It is the same with men. There are, I know, lots of men who would choose to go out and take a job and be the breadwinners. Or be athletes. Or something like that. And there are also men who would be happy staying at home and caring for their children. Or becoming art majors. It's who they are as a person.

Some women are, let's face it, just not the kind of person who ought to be a mother. Maybe it's because of emotional problems or difficulty committing to something like raising a child or just because she doesn't think she'd be ready for it. If that's the case, there's no reason why it should be expected of her. If she honestly is unable to settle to a "traditional" female life, she can, in this day and age, go for something else.

Same with men. Some men just are more suited for roles in society like being a stay-at-home dad. To me, there's nothing at all wrong with that. It's a worthwhile thing to do (it provides bonding between the child and the father).

Now out of curiosity, how do you see men as being "effeminised"? (If such a word exists... :\)

Men are adopting far more feminine and prissy fashions; the emo thing is trying to convince men that crying and bitching is a proper pasttime; even hip hop has come to such a point of strange vanity that it is disgusting.

Everybody lives in a plastic world.

Everybody wants to pretend life is a romantic comedy.

I could go on about this... But it would be its own thread. we can do this later.

[Dr. Boogie]

Generally speaking, I would like to see any institutions which attempt to regulate personal freedom destroyed -- that is to say, the federal and state governments themselves who come up with things like smoking bands, red tape for establishing businesses, who criminalize fun, who regulate alcohol and drug use, etc.

I knew you couldn't handle that request. I thought there was a faint chance you might actually name a specific institution, but you've been avoiding specifics ever since you came back.

Forget about my asking for specific people. Just say something like "the people who perpetuate the feminine values and think war is bad".

[Jeanette X]

Anything Christ made irrelevant is certainly... Irrelevant.

Christ spoke of marriage as the union of a man and a woman; polygamy is a thing of the past in Christian belief and doctrine.

So why do you squeal in outrage over gay relationships, and yet you don't breathe a word about divorce, which is expressly condemned in the New Testament save in the case of adultery:

31"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.'a]" class="footnote">[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%205:31-32#fen-NIV-23266a)] 32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. -Matthew 5:31-32

Why do you call LGBT supportive Christians hypocrites and yet seem so apathetic about divorce for reasons other than adultery?

[kahljorn]

cause he's a silly fucking idiot.

[Tadao]

Christianity is the main target? Get off the cross already.

[Jeanette X]

cause he's a silly fucking idiot.

Well yes, obviously, but I want to hear his attempts to defend his position so that I can laugh at him.

[Tadao]

I always thought Paganism was the main target.

[kahljorn]

you know what is most annoying about kulturfuckbags is how obvious it is that everything he says is vapid bullshit disguised by flowery sounding words. He's like a conman or something.

Like how can he say he wants to deregulate everything given his "sacrafice as the basis of morality" thread. I would punch this guys face so hard. I hate people who talk just to sound impressive to dipshits ;\

[Dr. Boogie]

Well yes, obviously, but I want to hear his attempts to defend his position so that I can laugh at him.

Haven't you seen enough evidence that he doesn't defend himself, so much as he hurls insults and accuses people of "splitting hairs"?

[Big McLargehuge]

Christianity is the main target because most western atheists grew up as or around christians and witnessed its idiocy first hand.

[Big McLargehuge]

end thread

[Big McLargehuge]

haha, yeah. :)





I bet KK throws up on his own penis and masturbates with the vomit.



Now that is not quite right...

YEAH GUYS HE FIRST CUTS HIS DICK WITH AND XACTO KNIFE FIRTS :rolleyes

[executioneer]

and encourages a doggie to lick it

[Big McLargehuge]

AND HIRES A BURLY HOMELESS MAN TO PISS ON THE DOG AND CALL IT A FAGGOT

[executioneer]

hey guess what now i only have to ignore one kk thread, yipee

[Dixie]

You're a genius Willie!

[Colonel Flagg]

hey guess what now i only have to ignore one kk thread, yipee

The only problem with this that I can see is that now the thread is a jumbled mishmash of intertwined discussions and competing conversations that is incredibly difficult to follow.

Oh wait, that's no different than before, now, is it?

Never Mind. :emilylitella

[kahljorn]

I think this thread is awesome now :(

although i dont think y ou should call it a philosophy jamboree! more like the sermon on mount gay

[Tadao]

:lol

[Kitsa]

That kind of shit is the exact reason I would never want to be a college professor and read people's stupid fucking papers.

I lucked out and didn't delve any further than foreign languages, where plenty of comedy could be had at the surface with little effort involved.

[Dixie]

Christianity makes a great target because it comes with it's own cross hairs.

[Tadao]

http://a1.phobos.apple.com/us/r30/Purple/5d/c4/be/mzl.mdwscbvc.480x480-75.jpg

[VaporTrailx1]

How come prostitution is illegal? Legitimate relationships that lead to sex or not can have far more destructive outcomes.

[kahljorn]

in the new testament somewhere, mark i think, it says that its better to stick your seed in a prostitute than to let it go to waste on the floor ;o

[VaporTrailx1]

So in the Bible, knocking up a hooker is more acceptable than jerkin it in the shower?
I think there was a part in the Old Testament where God killed someone for pulling out as well.

[Big McLargehuge]

one time when i was like 14 i spilled my seed in a church bathroom.

[pac-man]

Bravo

[Kulturkampf]

what the fuck just happened. I wanted to fucking respond to this fucking shit after a hard night of drinking and I am stuck with you arrogant piss cunts trying to sound like you are condescending to me -- but that, my friend, is nothing less than a bunch of swine uniting in opinion.

you're fucking shallow cunts -- my dick is already busting through your cervix, you cock-in-mouth dick-hearts.

I will get back to you some other fucking occasion than this lunch time.

[Tadao]

Shut up and eat your Pho.

[kahljorn]

" So in the Bible, knocking up a hooker is more acceptable than jerkin it in the shower?"

in the new testament, at least.

[Dixie]

http://www.thecomedynet.com/wp-content/gallery/newimages5/laughing%20gifs.gif

[Dr. Boogie]

King Richard the Dick-Heart.:lol

[Colonel Flagg]

what the fuck just happened. I wanted to fucking respond to this fucking shit after a hard night of drinking and I am stuck with you arrogant piss cunts trying to sound like you are condescending to me -- but that, my friend, is nothing less than a bunch of swine uniting in opinion.

you're fucking shallow cunts -- my dick is already busting through your cervix, you cock-in-mouth dick-hearts.

I will get back to you some other fucking occasion than this lunch time.

Somebody needs a hug.

[The Leader]

And a good dicking, apparently.

[Kitsa]

I long for the good old days of quiet smugness.

[Jeanette X]

what the fuck just happened. I wanted to fucking respond to this fucking shit after a hard night of drinking and I am stuck with you arrogant piss cunts trying to sound like you are condescending to me -- but that, my friend, is nothing less than a bunch of swine uniting in opinion.

you're fucking shallow cunts -- my dick is already busting through your cervix, you cock-in-mouth dick-hearts.

I will get back to you some other fucking occasion than this lunch time.

You have proven your intellectual superiority with your articulate and thoughtful arguments. I bow before your wit. :lol

[VaporTrailx1]

"cock-in-mouth dick-hearts?"

[ZeldaQueen]

Men are adopting far more feminine and prissy fashions; the emo thing is trying to convince men that crying and bitching is a proper pasttime; even hip hop has come to such a point of strange vanity that it is disgusting.

Everybody lives in a plastic world.

Everybody wants to pretend life is a romantic comedy.

I could go on about this... But it would be its own thread. we can do this later.

Just so you know, emo and hip hop is just a teenage fad. Like how teenagers during Beatlemania grew out their hair. I know plenty of guys that aren't into those things and I also know a lot of those guys who are into those but still could easily be considered "manly".

Oh yes, and I think this might be interesting to you. Carl Jung came up with an idea of "anima vs animus". The concept says about how people have within them both feminine and masculine qualities. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anima_and_animus

[kahljorn]

:lol
What's the point in sharing knowledge with somebody who doesn't even know the ambiguous nature of social roles and probably wouldn't understand if you did share it. ;\

its kinda interesting that the new testament grew out of the debauchery of the roman empire ;\ not too surprising that prostitutes weren't such a horrible thing ;o

[VaporTrailx1]

I've seen 30year old emos.
And Hip Hop a teenage fad? Maybe out in the burbs. But not in da hood. But then again there are plenty of people who never psychologically mature beyond 16. Walk into any bar on a Friday night if you want proof.

[pac-man]

I like how the appropriate article for "hood" is apparently "da" rather than "the."

[Tadao]

That's what the darkies decided to name it. Other races have different name for their low income housing areas.

[Dr. Boogie]

If you have a cock in your mouth, and a dick in your heart, isn't that just more masculinity?

[Kitsa]

I was watching a documentary about hippies that claimed that "da hood" was improving before the hippies came along with their filth and their drugs and their need for low-rent places to crash.

[pac-man]

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2008/05/30/hoodklan_narrowweb__300x400,0.jpg

[Tadao]

I was watching a documentary about hippies that claimed that "da hood" was improving before the hippies came along with their filth and their drugs and their need for low-rent places to crash.

I don't know if low income housing will every not have a drug and theft problem. If everyone became responsible citizens and it would be turned into the suburb it was before and da hood would relocate.

[Kitsa]

I fell asleep :/

[ZeldaQueen]

I've seen 30year old emos.
And Hip Hop a teenage fad? Maybe out in the burbs. But not in da hood. But then again there are plenty of people who never psychologically mature beyond 16. Walk into any bar on a Friday night if you want proof.

I'm assuming that we were talking about Emo as the music genre here. And where I live at least, hip hop is just a kind of music that kids listen to. Kids also wear hoodies and wear their pants low, but it's a style. A teenage thing. I've never heard of hip hop encouraging "strange vanity".

[Tadao]

I've never heard of hip hop encouraging "strange vanity".

:gigh

[ZeldaQueen]

Right. Like people need an excuse to wear huge ugly jewelry.

http://www.royal-magazin.de/england/queen/Bilder/oriental-circlet-tiara-Queen.jpg

[Tadao]

It's even better that you have no idea what I'm talking about.

[Evil Robot]

I would like you all to know that thanks to the many instances of the word "Korea" in this forum, we no have ads for the Korean market. Thank you Kultukampf, it's people like you who prevent search engines from working properly.
http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/imgad?id=CP_2rKmGxo6Q4AEQ2AUYWjIIeTJM6I2Iu_c

[Jeanette X]

Right. Like people need an excuse to wear huge ugly jewelry.

http://www.royal-magazin.de/england/queen/Bilder/oriental-circlet-tiara-Queen.jpg

No, that's actually rather nice. This is huge ugly jewelery:
http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t191/LydiaDianne/Bling.jpg

[b_squared]

you're fucking shallow cunts -- my dick is already busting through your cervix, you cock-in-mouth dick-hearts.


Thus speaketh the Noble Savage. How dignified he sounds.

[Zhukov]

Is the dick heart the bit on the end? We call that the Herman Gelmet, but I guess it could look sort of like a heart if one were inclined to draw it that way on a tattoo.

[ZeldaQueen]

Thus speaketh the Noble Savage. How dignified he sounds.
:lol

[kahljorn]

lol.
im pretty sure a noble savage is somebody who takes the reasoning and intelligence of the contemporary world and lives without government; in a state of nature. ;\ oh nm its just when we live unrestrained by a society cause GUBERMENTS and rules are what causes us to be bad. OPTIMISM/ STRAIN

i call my brother in law a noble savage all the time lol :(

[Tadao]

KK reminds me of Don Quixote. He reads romantic novels about being a fair and just person, creates an imaginary world in which to perform his noble deeds, fucks it all up in real life, and believes that people are praising him when they actually want o lock him up for being such and idiot.

[ZeldaQueen]

Is it just me or is the term "noble savage" kind of...derogatory? Like "magical negro"?

It almost reminds me of in "Take Up the White Man's Burden", when the nonEuropean people are described as "sullen" and "half devil and half child".

[kahljorn]

not really similar at all its basically an anarchist/optimistic idea that if there were no society man would be perfect. Or, that society is what creates bad and evil people.

[MattJack]

can somebody just gimme the cliff notes to this thread?

kthx

[Colonel Flagg]

KK makes wordy and obliquely offensive statements.

General argument, laughter and derision from the masses.

KK whines and says he's going away.

There is much rejoicing.

[ZeldaQueen]

not really similar at all its basically an anarchist/optimistic idea that if there were no society man would be perfect. Or, that society is what creates bad and evil people.
I get it. Just seems a little rude the way it's put. That's probably just me though. :\

[Jeanette X]

The notion of the noble savage is just horseshit. Anyone who believes it should spend a year among the Yanomano or the Korowai and see how "noble" their behavior is from our point of view.

I can say this with a certain amount of authority because I just got accepted into graduate school to get a master's in anthropology. BOOYAH! :smug

[MattJack]

KK makes wordy and obliquely offensive statements.

General argument, laughter and derision from the masses.

KK whines and says he's going away.

There is much rejoicing.


I believe he's a character.

[ZeldaQueen]

The notion of the noble savage is just horseshit. Anyone who believes it should spend a year among the Yanomano or the Korowai and see how "noble" their behavior is from our point of view.

I can say this with a certain amount of authority because I just got accepted into graduate school to get a master's in anthropology. BOOYAH! :smug
I hate you. >:

Actually, it's anthropology I hate. >:

[Jeanette X]

I hate you. >:

Actually, it's anthropology I hate. >:

Why? I'm backing up the point you made. :confused:

[kahljorn]

tribes are a type of society, as such the argument could be made that they corrupt human beings.

But yea, usually people bring that type of stuff up to refute it.

[Jeanette X]

tribes are a type of society, as such the argument could be made that they corrupt human beings.



Precisely. Just because a society may not be technologically advanced doesn't mean that they are as socially complex as our own.

[Colonel Flagg]

I believe he's a character.

Never thought about it. Could be. :conspiracy

[pac-man]

That crazy Kulturkampf! He's a character all right! :lol

[VaporTrailx1]

da hood has started to streamline things. There is now only 1 word for "to be" which is "is". Are and am are obsolete.

[ZeldaQueen]

Why? I'm backing up the point you made. :confused:
No no, it's not you it's anthropology. I have to take it this semester for my natural science credit and I hate it. I did really badly on the first test and I only have two others to fix it.

Anywho...

Precisely. Just because a society may not be technologically advanced doesn't mean that they are as socially complex as our own

That's why the term "noble savage" bothered me. It seemed to imply that people who lived in tribes or "uncivilized" places were inferior. Europeans thought that the native Africans were "savages", but the Africans were the ones who were smelting iron and enjoying a good standard of living while Europe rotted from the Black Plague.

[Jeanette X]

No no, it's not you it's anthropology. I have to take it this semester for my natural science credit and I hate it. I did really badly on the first test and I only have two others to fix it.


I assume it was physical anthropology, which I'm not to crazy about either, for the record. My area is cultural anthropology, which is a whole 'nother ball of wax.

[ZeldaQueen]

I assume it was physical anthropology, which I'm not to crazy about either, for the record. My area is cultural anthropology, which is a whole 'nother ball of wax.

Yes it is. Right now we're studying the physical characteristics of monkeys. Joy. :rolleyes:

Cultural does sound more fun, but physical was what fulfilled the requirement, so it is what I must take. Woot.

[kahljorn]

I'm taking physical anthropology right now too :(

[ZeldaQueen]

It sucks, doesn't it?

Did your class have to learn how to label the parts of a lemur's tooth?

[kahljorn]

Its kind of a fun class ;o

I don't really know what you mean by label the parts of a lemurs tooth :( but we learned about TEETHS.

[ZeldaQueen]

We had to learn about parts of molars.

We're learning about Hominidae (humans and apes) right now. I'm working on a one or two page summary of notes for them (not so bad actually).

[kahljorn]

that's what we're learning ;o
we just had to learn the different types of teeth and that all primates have unspecialized teeth ;/

[ZeldaQueen]

Ah, I see.

We've moved past that and are now on the traits of Hominidae (apes and humans). Hopefully, this'll be easier to remember. :\

[kahljorn]

yea we talked about that too ;o

[Colonel Flagg]

So is this now the anthropology thread?

Maybe Willie should change the title again.

[ZeldaQueen]

Eh, it evolved. ;)

[executioneer]

hahah POST COUNT FIGHT... TWO???

[kahljorn]

Mind y our own business colonel flag