A point of constitutional philosophy: implicit protections.

Pedro, you’re very far from being virtuous.

You do not honour women in the least by honouring them simply because they’re female. If there is anything women do not respect its that kind of behaviour.
But, they’ll tell you how good of a friend you are.

But yeah, the great white knight. Its so beautiful I’m practically blubbering.

It is true that, by now, Phoneutria understands more of any points being made here than you do. You know why? Because I was tough on her and she didn’t run away into the excuses you kept trying to hand her. Like, her being a woman, thus not having to listen to reason, not having to uphold standards…

Women aren’t actually as spineless as all that.

Read the first two pages again. This is not at all what happened.

Good ol’ Good vs Evil, Light vs Darkness shit going on around here, huh?

You had a good mother, is what it tells me.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That I did.

I envy the shit out of your children, if you have them or if you ever do.

Fair enough you weren’t instantly insulting his mother. But … you were being radically offensive, and I still literally get nauseous reading this, this whole “statistics and my schoolteacher and android toll me I cant take a long, well written, complex text seriously” - it is, to me, a very grave dishonouring of the mind.

I really mean that.

I do not think I was excessively hard on you at all.

lol, fixed, the great teacher
If he didn’t push me so hard
Where would I ever be

Yes yes, be ungrateful. Or… feign it for da homies.

I have to laugh because you are so vain.

Yes, me too.

Nice for a thread that started so contentious to end with a good belly laugh.

But then again, there are many things that have been misappropriated to the realm of the political. That is what politics is now, a game of misappropriating things to politics. Things like gay marriage or, to go back to the main point of the thread- drug use; these aren’t even political discussions. They are simple personal liberties here that have been obfuscated and turned into political squabbles to distract everyone from the actual politics.

"Me, I couldn’t care less about how lenghty the paragraphs are in regard to articulating one’s philosophical assessment of implicit constitutional protections. Instead, my complaint revolves around how those paragraphs can go on and on and on as though the actual “human condition” did not exist at all. Satyr in particular is obsessed with exploring all of this in intellectual contraptions. "

It doesn’t, the human condition: when we are discussing the philosophy of law or actual legal matters themselves. You might as well include the human condition in a discussion of mathematics as a rationale for allowing your numbers to get fuzzy.

Legislating morality, my main issue with conservative parties.

It is good to see you posting again, Parodites.

I got sick, a cold; but those hit me harder than a flu does, as I’ve smoked three packs of cigarettes a day since I was 13 or 14, and I’m 30 now. And I rip the filters off before I smoke them so it’s really like double that I suppose. And narcotics suppress my breathing and coughing reflex, so together it causes me to accumulate massive amounts of fluid and I am very prone to pneumonia. I’d have much preferred to be vomiting than suffocating, but it looks like I didn’t die again, so I have returned.

When I was a child, I would obsess over death; every time I heard of the existence of a new disease or way of dying, I would become hypochondriacal about it for months; I’d spend hours inspecting my entire body for the slightest sign of melanoma, etc; every bump, lump, or discoloration was surely a cancerous lesion that was going to kill me. I feared to even be around second-hand smoke, worrying of cancer. At that age, about 14 or 15, I filled entire notebooks with ontological arguments for the immortality of the soul, trying to convince myself there was a way to exist beyond death. I was quite mad. But I learned to accept that I was going to die one day, and living for another year or for another 100 years makes no difference, when the only thing I want is to live forever. A year and thousand years are the same compared to eternity. So I pay no mind to my health anymore; exercise is for purely aesthetic and narcissistic reasons, as is the majority of my activity. ’

I am mad, but I am not mentally ill. There is a difference. If I could have a wish granted, I would wish to absorb every living mind into myself and live forever,- alone, the last being, the final end of all existence: as a disembodied consciousness drifting in the void after the last protons decay, for trillions of years, writing more books than there were ever atoms in the universe as a reflection of- me, of my infinitudes; forever. I want to become everything; I want to transform everything, into myself and live forever. A reverse solipsism. And after spending 15 years in voluntary solitary confinement, I actually could bear eternity, alone, for Time ceases to have meaning in that environment, which played no small part in freeing my mind from worry about death.

But that is gnosis. If you can “know” (gnosis, that is what the word means; knowledge beyond knowledge) eternity- if you can understand eternity, well that is eternity. That understanding is eternity.

That’s all both sides ever do is legislate morality (well that and loot us), they just have different ideas about what’s moral.

What they do is keep everyone distracted arguing morality, in the meantime they can slip the stuff that actually matters under the radar.

By they I mean the three powers, and the money interests behind them.

For example hate speech. You’re not allowed to criticize, or express dislike of someone because of their nationality, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability and so on. That’s legislating morality.