Are you implying that you prefer living a life believing the world is flat? Why is this unsurprising, Kropotkin???
Yes, truth at what cost. And truth at what importance too, when people learn regurgitated facts without understanding them or questioning their source?
The world is spherical, Kropotkin. You’re going to lose the argument, but, somebody always has to pick the losing side. Maybe you just love the underdog.
Haha. Progs only condemn incest with a conservative compares it to homosexuality. This time it was done in Salon Magazine, so all you’re going to get is love and acceptance for sibling fucking.
As soon as one liberal says “Ewwwwww”, the rest of his fellow liberals will condemn him for being a bigot.
This will be fun watching liberalism split in two, along with all the conservatives who say “I told ya so!!!” when they argued (decades ago) that homosexuality leads to other sexual perversions.
It won’t be a split among liberals. Any liberal who rejects incest will be revealed (by the others) to have not been a ‘true liberal’ the whole time. Also, you have to consider the power of blacklisting. When it comes to popular media, book publishing and so on, it will be quietly decided what the appropriate progressive stance is, and anything else simply won’t see the light of day unless the author flees to the ‘reactionary press’ or the ‘bigoted dark side of the blogosphere’ or all the other lovely terms progs have for anybody who says anything they disagree with.
Right on, exactly
Whiter way liberals go factionally or unanimously, or conservatives for that matter, depends on political expediency. The separation of church and state dictates this course, and handshakes through the middle of the aisle ultimately, become the executive point of view. It’s all about money, constituancy;no one cares about the buggery of other people before the jobs are secured which pay for the bread and butter of the political elite. Only the little people pay taxes, and those in control do not care what those do in the privacy of their own domains. It’s just not the way it works.
[quote=“Wizard”]
[quote=“Peter Kropotkin”]
K: and now get to what you are all
About! You think you have a “TRUTH”
and by god, you are going to force people
to follow that “TRUTH” whether or not
they want to or not. It is as usual for the
Christian about power to dictate to people
how they live and what god they will
follow even if they resist. Indeed truth at what
cost! Even to enslaving your fellow man
Because they don’t follow your truth. How
Very Christian of you.
W: Are you implying that you prefer living a life believing the world is flat? Why is this unsurprising, Kropotkin???
K: I am not implying anything. I am saying your need to compel people to follow your truths regardless
of what they believe is the important part. It is about your need to force people (as you said) to
follow your truth regardless of the cost. That is the take away here. You believe god is a “TRUTH”
and you must compel them to follow your truth, regardless of the cost. Your arrogance that only “YOU”
hold the truth and must force people to follow your truth is astonishing. No one beside you
knows the truth and forcing them to listen to your truth regardless of the cost. Those are your words,
not mine. The fact that you feel the need to forcibly convert others to your viewpoint says volumes
about you. I have no need to forcibly convert anyone. If they accept great, if not, that great too.
You on the other hand, feels the need to convert everybody who doesn’t believe as you do.
It is a sign of your megalomania that you need to convert anyone who doesn’t agree with your
beliefs. I feel sad for anyone who is so sure of themselves without cause. recall your bible,
pride comes before the fall.
Kropotkin
So you’re saying religious people need to get out of the way and allow the acceptance of incest? Because if not, I don’t see what your rage at religious people has to do with anything. Seems like you found out Wizard was religious in another thread, and now you’re following him around making things about that when they aren’t.
K: first things first, Wizard has made it clear he is religious and everyone, everyone needs to
be religious too. That has been his message first, last and always. What is he always saying,
God is possible, (whatever the hell that means) Now when he says that he has a truth and
even if 95% of people don’t believe it, he must go out and convert them, no matter what the cost.
These are his words, not mine. So clearly, he has an agenda and he has made it clear,
his agenda is converting people to the religious, no matter what the cost. (and the cost to
wizards soul will be the greatest cost incurred, he just hasn’t figured that out yet)
now as far as personal behavior goes, yes, what two consenting adults do in their home or bedroom is
off limits for the religious, regardless of who is doing what with whom, as long as they are
adults (18) and consenting. There is no place for religion in people’s bedroom.
Kropotkin
In this thread? Because all I see you doing is telling him he shouldn’t dare to have an opinion about anything because he’s a religious person. In fact, you started your interactions with him by bringing up religion and reminding him that you wish there were no such things as religions.
Excellent, so you don’t have any moral problem with incest, that’s what I wanted to know.
SOOOO to the rest of us, now that we have the admission that the cultural Marxists are fine with incest and don’t think it should be restricted, I suppose the question is what do we do about cultural Marxism turning our society into a cesspit of debauchery?
K: now as far as personal behavior goes, yes, what two consenting adults do in their home or bedroom is
off limits for the religious, regardless of who is doing what with whom, as long as they are
adults (18) and consenting. There is no place for religion in people’s bedroom.
U: Excellent, so you don’t have any moral problem with incest, that’s what I wanted to know.
SOOOO to the rest of us, now that we have the admission that the cultural Marxists are fine with incest and don’t think it should be restricted, I suppose the question is what do we do about cultural Marxism turning our society into a cesspit of debauchery?
K: and with every step forward, people say that way leads to “cesspit of debauchery” I am old enough
to remember when it was illegal for blacks to marry whites and it was said that allowing blacks to marry
whites will lead to “cesspit of debauchery”. Every single step forward has been attacked because it
could, might, possibly lead to “cesspit of debauchery”. allowing women to vote, that way leads to
complete and total disaster, the end of the world. And allowing blacks into the military, well that
would completely destroy the military and lead to the destruction of the United states. Ending
Jim crow laws, well that will certainly destroy America as we know it. You have to keep blackie down,
you know, for the betterment of America. Every single advance over the last 60 years has been
decried as the end of civilization as we know it and every single one has been true, right?
Kropotkin
That is an extremely dangerous social premise to have and that is the actual problem, neither homosexuality nor incest.
Secondly,it has nothing to have with religions. You use uselessly associating it with religions. It is merely societal/moral issue. What is good for the society as a whole?
Do you think that two real brothers having gay sex in the front of the camera is morally right?
Is it a good precedent for the young minds?
Would you accept that if they were your sons?
Is the same is true in the case of public display of father/son or mother/daughter homosexual sex, given that son/daughter are above 18?
Unlike others conservatives, i accept that we did make mistakes by not allowing liberty in some cases. But, this does not mean that all personal restrictions were wrong also. Society must strike the balance between liberty and freedom.
If it is too cold to bear at the hilltop, jumping in the fire will not benifit either. The wise solution is either wear enough woolen clothes at the hilltop or set near the fire.
Secondly, you forgetting that it was not bedroom affair but in public domain. This would have not become the issue, in the first place, had they kept it within their bedroom.
with love,
sanjay
That is true. I also enjoy PK's implication that only religious people have a hard time with the idea of siblings fucking each other, like rational people always thought it was fine until the Baptists condemned it. It's a political tactic- PK saw a religious person in the thread and he hopes to divert the focus from the truth:
The progressive approach to sex is incrementally ushering in all the perversion the conservatives warned about that the progs insisted would never happen.
And now here you are, a few decades later, defending gay incest.
That makes the conservatives absolutely right by my count.
Yes, progressive attitudes to sex led us into a cesspit of debauchery. Just because you’re able to hold your nose and defend gay incest without puking doesn’t mean it isn’t so.
You don’t think it’s a bit racist or sexist to compare abolition and women’s suffrage to letting siblings fuck each other?
Let us ban gay incest because it offends my sensibilities. Because
of course MY morals are the one to follow. Anything that violates
MY morals needs to be banned.
all we have done now is your morals define someone else’s actions.
We can’t allow … this because it is an abomination, IE against my religion, my morals.
we can’t have gay incest because it violates MY morals.
That is the entire argument against gay incest as it was
the argument against marriage between blacks and whites, women voting,
blacks in the military, they need to be banned because it is against my morals and
might lead to the cesspool of debauchery.
Kropotkin
Sorry, but that is just flat out stupid. If you changed your word “religion” to “government”, I would agree. And what you are saying is that government has a place in the bedroom, but not religion.
The problem is that religion is an issue of what those same people believe for themselves. The government is NOT supposed to be in that position, else it IS the religion (Pharaohism = Modern Socialistic America). What people believe goes with them no matter where they are, bedroom or battle front. Their religion is where ever they are. That cannot be changed regardless of liberal fantasies and denials.
Why are you making it personal? Incest is just about the most universal, long-lasting taboo in the history of human civilization. It’s permitted even less than homosexuality. Just about every civilization, every creed, every religion, every culture, and everybody everywhere throughout time thinks that incest is unacceptable, you argue that we have to permit it because 21st century progressiveness is inconsistent if we don’t, and somehow you think that adds up to ME being the one pushing my morals on other people?
What about you, and people like you, pushing us into a society where we have to accept siblings fucking each other. Doesn’t that count as forcing your morals on others? When you start calling people who are against incest ‘hate mongers’ and push for them to lose their jobs, will THAT be forcing your morals on others?
Again- you scoffed at the idea of your permissive attitudes leading to debauchery, and now you’re forced to defend gay incest. You have been proven wrong. Here you are literally telling me that gay incest is alright with you and we all have to put up with it, at the SAME TIME as you laugh at the idea that your values are leading to a sexually perverted society. Are progressives just immune to irony or what?
PS; Who’s arguing that gay incest may lead to a cesspit of debauchery? IT IS THE PIT. We have arrived. All that’s left to sort out is who fucking drug us into it, and since you’re proudly taking credit, I guess that’s a short investigation.
Soon the pendulum will reach its apex and begin swinging the other way. There’s only so much “tolerance” before it runs out. Liberals and marxists have dug themselves a very deep grave.
That is very and exactly true. But realize that is a part of the designed intent.
One creates a Nazi regime by promoting liberalism - the backlash, an effort of life to balance itself by exerting the opposite extreme and a very nasty one in this case. The liberals are creating the very tyranny they profess to abhor (again, just as intended by those inspiring them to do so).
I also say “Ewwww” but I don’t think that me, or anybody else being disgusted justifies attempting to prevent 2 consenting adults from performing actions that harm no one in the privacy of their home.
The laws of the government must override those of religions, otherwise we would either have theocracy or chaos. Neither should have a place in the bedroom.
Yes, of course. Why not?