after having to spend some time around disabled people recently i can safely say i am pro-abortion. and you know what? why does it matter if theyre born or not, just kill them when theyre kids as well, hell, when theyre adults even. this topic troubles me, because beforehand i had thought i was pretty staunchly against murder, but when it comes to disabled people i find i dont give a shit. and well fuck it if were doing away with disabled people we might as well get rid of the blacks while were at it. no no, i mustve missed something somewhere, i just cant put my finger on it...

>>30
My stance is simple. I agree with both the Catholic, and the Satanist: Abortion is murder.
Predictably, I also agree with the Catholic on the matter of not permitting it.

It's murder. But murder can be an act of mercy. Ie. it's OK for getting rid of people with severe deformities/disablities, etc., but it shouldn't be used for silly reasons like it just being an unintended child (including rape).
I view some races (basketball devils, indians) as sub-human, though, and the word "murder" only applies for humans. Ie. I don't care if those races get abortions, and it should actually be beneficial.

I can only defend abortion in case of rape or if the fetus is dysgenic, don't want a women wanting to be forced to have a subhuman kid..

Christianity in this area is cuckolry, because a women is forced to be cursed by a subhuman breed because it's is apparently a "plan of God"

>>968
That's simply impossible since the state ideology of Imperial Japan, State-Shinto, was religious in nature. Japan staying out the war or winning the war would have meant a strengthening of its native religious traditions (Shinto) and a weakening of all foreign doctrines, including Buddhism, which wass already happening prior to the war.
That and the fact that Christianity had already been present in Japan for centuries and never managed to spread outside of these obscure little communities.

>>969
Korean culture is shit so that's okay.
Chinese killed more of each other during their civil war than Japan did in their war against them.

>>825
>Age is irrelevant
'They cannot believe that there are cultural values that are the result of centuries of historical development, which cannot simply be bought. It was no bad joke when, after the war, they bought the ruins of German castles and moved them stone by stone to the U.S.A. They really thought that they had purchased a piece of national history embodied in stone, and were naive enough to think that mocking laughter from Europe was respect for the wealth that enabled them to buy what their own tradition and culture lacked'.

'Although we affirm the technical achievements of our age, we see behind them an intellectual strength that grows from the roots of our people. Machines are a means to an end, not an end in themselves. As much as we appreciate the achievements of modern civilization and use them to improve life, we know that they are not the sole meaning of life. There are national values that are the result of centuries of history and tradition. They cannot be purchased, only built by the labor of generations'.

>>968
>>1004
Hirohito actually offered to make Japan a christian country during the peace talks, but it got refused from the U.S.

Is the Buddhist roots of Japanese morality not the slave morality you hate so much? Nietzche criticizes the ascetics as being no better than Judeo-Christian repressive slave morality in that the ascetic priest willingly represses his will to power, rejecting natural desires and sources of joy, to numb the emotions and to give meaning to life. This is done by occupying the mind with vast amounts of mindless work and a sense of "loving your neighbor" - a community of shared interest. This sounds a lot like the ideals Japan has, and if you had actually spent any time there instead of basing your knowledge of Japan on its cultural exports, you'd realize the reason anime is so morally different from western media is because it acts as a moral escape from the extremely repressive Japanese working life - no wonder there are millions of shut-ins unable to comply with these ideals, expending all of their time to that beautiful moral escape of Japanese media!

I'll agree with you for the most part, except for the idea of Japan being an exception to this. The specific moral values of Japan may be different, as you've identified it being untainted by Judeo-Christian ideals, but the morality it does have is equally as repressive. Perhaps they are simply more self-aware of this and have created an adequate escapist medium for sustainability.

Japan is even more consumerist than the US. The average American is a hedonist, consumerist, and has to work a lot to barely make it by and save a couple hundred a month for savings. Japan takes these and multiplies it.

Westerners don't hate cuteness. Both the US and Japan use tactics to psychologically influence people in a bad way. Japan uses the most text on TV out of any other country to keep people watching, youtubers adopted this. The US uses seх in almost every form of media. Both brainwash their people to pacify them and make them work a lot and spend what little they have on consumerist bs.

>>1760
The only kind of country which would allow for a more pleasant lifestyle for the average person, are those like Norway. Small, low population, overflowing with cash.

>>616
Who's shocked? I'm just telling him like it is.

Also to the people reading this on /tat/, a lot of the frustrated replies are from people upset this was posted on /so/.

>>595
>Likewise yeah as people have said I'm a loser, I'm a loser by this socialites standards. I've never had a ticket or been to jail, never touched drugs or alcohol, I'm physically fit without so much as an allergy, I have more money in savings than 75% of Americans do with my only debt being a half paid off mortgage. I have a job I don't hate and I avoid steeling, lying, and cheating as best I can. But, I'm a fucking loser! Why is that? Because I don't like the environment I was forced to grow up in? Speaking my mind about it? That I stopped trying to keep offline friends after the ones I had repeatedly robbed and took advantage of me? Because I haven't had sex a dozen random loose women? or I have have no "team" and have no idea who won the last Superbowl? That I don't own the latest phone or drive a car with oversized rims? I don't give a shit about vbloggers, or whatever degenerate skank is the hottest trending """artist""" at the moment? Because I don't go out drinking or blaze up with the bros? Or is it that I like Chinese porn cartoons? If these things make me a loser, than I'll just be both a loser and a faggot in the eyes of people who's opinions mean absolutely nothing to me.
Honestly, these are actual truths about the average American ford drivers I've dealt with for pretty much my whole life so far.

I'm not. Stop being a pussy.

Arguments about clothes are vain and I don't care very much.

What women have done is get together in New York circa 1848 and decide that they're going to be feminists, and that feminism entails that they're going to be just like men. In being identical to men, they're awarded responsibilities which they are bad at carrying, but refuse to delegate those responsibilities to anybody else even though they're not cut out for them, because they know those around them won't make them pay any accountability. This is also true for men. The difference is that men tend to self-regulate responsibility more, are held to it moreso, and don't latch onto it as though if they let go they'll be worthless and left for dead;- they were already held worthless from the start.

That's the problem. Women make such undesirable company because they're performing a drag act in which they all larp as men. If you got a Thai bride, she would still talk more than a Thai man. She would still use more deceit than a man. But you would not care half as much because she's behaviorally just doing woman things. I don't even care that western women have abandoned traditional beauty. But to have a nurturing element that manifests worse than mine is inexcusable.

I got an email from a woman peppered with exclamation points, and I thought "why the hell do they do this". Found an article about it, and as predicted, its explanation is that women are expected to as way of appearing friendly, and basically the patriarchy.

Colleges have more women, in a lot of places they get paid more, they get preferential legal treatment, and every mainstream piece of media puts them on a pedestal, but they STILL go on about that shit.

Anyway, that's not my expectation. I find it annoying and prefer people write like how I do. I don't want to be able to tell a woman wrote something just by reading it. I think that's the real reason why they do it, to communicate that they're a women, which is something they do subconsciously.

Low intelligence + low compassion + hatred of men.

>>1730
The lack of compassion and hate of men seems really blatant and hard not to notice. Lot of them seem to even take pride in it.

Well it's finally here and it's fucking gay. There were two main goals of animegate: to stop censorship of anime/otaku media before it starts, and to cleanse to otaku community of posers and ironic weebs. Both, so far, have not been successful.
Most of the people involved in this movement are posers and ironic weebs. Hell, I actually saw a tweet where these neckbeards, claiming to be a part of animegate, were defending this Stacy from "harassment". So basically, instead of kicking out posers, animegaters are encouraging them and it's fucking frustrating.
The only good thing coming out of this movement is that Vic Mignogna is receiving support after being falsely accused of rape. Other than that, this movement needs to get it's shit together.
>>492
>Kardashian
I remember that tweet (or tweets rather). I remember everyone in the online community I was a part of, were PISSED and were saying that it was the beginning of the end. Shortly after that tweet, I began seeing normalfags use anime as a social statement by changing their yt icons to anime girls and posing with katanas. Then, anime ops and eds began to skyrocket in views. Where there used to be around one to two million turned into twelve to twenty million. Anime became the "cool kid thing" and it pissed every otaku off because these were the same kinds of people that would kick their ass in highschool for watching anime. And then, of course, this led to companies already beginning to try to sanitize anime to make it PC and easy to swallow.
We wouldn't have to have these online mobs or "gates" if we simply knew how to tell these posers to fuck off. The metal scene in the 80s did a pretty good job of it, see we need to learn from them.

>>628
>Well it's finally here and it's fucking gay.
It is? What is? before seeing this thread I don't think I'd have known something called "animegate" existed. In my eyes, not really much has changed lately, so how does this affect anyone side from those keeping close eyes on celebrity twitter accounts or what have you. I still have a real hard time believing anime is the "cool kid thing" now.

>>628
>I actually saw a tweet
>I remember that tweet (or tweets rather).
>Most of the people involved in this movement are posers and ironic weebs

you've clearly got a social media obsession just like the rest of norman society, how certain are you that you're not part of the problem the you're complaining about?

I think the only reason left-wing boycotts work is not because little green haired goblins start boycotting you, but because they get all the banks that provide financing to look at boycotting you. Cultures within those banks are all universal, and are all foregone concluded. The co-opting of our financial services is a success. I don't know what we are going to do now.

We hurt budweiser to the tune of a billion dollars income a year, but due to the nature of the corpo we picked all it means is that they will make 14 billion dollars instead of 15 billion dollars.

Anime companies are smaller and can be hurt worse, but ultimately you are not their paymasters; ultimately that job goes to the banks.

I think op is a bunch of tired, tribalistic bullshit.

>>1676

Liking JKs is normal but Japanese normies will still call you a lolicon for liking 15–18-year-old girls. despite it technically not being pedo at all just like people being called pedos for liking 16-year-olds in America.

>>1677

I beg to differ.

>Basically, people who call themselves lolicons even though they aren't pedophiles despite the fact that lolicon and shotacon mean pedophile in Japanese.
I would say the opinion of the Japanese on the "true" meaning of the word is irrelevant. Why assume the Japanese are the ultimate authority on what the word means? It's good to know how the Japanese see the word, but that's only when you're speaking to a Japanese person. Any word, can have any meaning. If a group of people are using it consistently, to convey a specific idea, then that's the meaning, for them. That's just how language works.

Also, what "is" an "ironic lolicon"?

Initially, I would assume an "ironic lolicon" was someone that enjoyed lolicon material, "ironically." They would do so, whilst looking down on it, and maintaining their self-awareness that it's actually bad.
I think the word "irony" here is being used weirdly though. It's more like "A guy that's ironically a lolicon" rather than "A guy that enjoys lolicon with a sense of irony".

And finally, I want to say that that image was confusing. Your post clearly describes the "ironic lolicon" as someone who calls themself a lolicon, despite not being a pedophile, and yet the image argues that the "ironic lolicon" is in fact, truly a pedophile! This was a bad post OP. Up until today, I've been confused every time I saw it.

>>1690
All pussy is good pussy.

The british should not mix, their genes should not be passed on if we are to protect planet earth.

Ideally it shouldn't happen, but if it were to, the men should be white, and, on their land.

>>1690
Not bad, but, unpreferred I think. I think it can work when both parents, despite differing in race, have been raised in the same culture. But yeah, if there's even cultural differences, perhaps, as the wife takes the father's surname, and, as the wife converts to the husband's religion in mixed-religion marriages, perhaps the parents should agree that the children should conform to the father. Perhaps in religion if that's a factor, but definitely in culture. That's my main point.

But yeah, when two races mix, they kind of create a new race, one that doesn't really fit in anywhere. Racemixing will always certainly be the unpreferred option. Acceptable, but not preferred. At the very least, I would hope that those in a mixed-race marriage create many children, because, I think in some sad sense, the siblings only really have each other.

>>1714
>I would hope that those in a mixed-race marriage create many children, because, I think in some sad sense, the siblings only really have each other.
Only child here of mixed parents. Yeah, shit sucks.

>>1660

>Then there's no debate.
There is if you anwser my questions. There isn't if you wish to concede.

In don't disagree that people in poverty aren't more likely to be stupid and impuslive. And I don't disagree that a god chunk of blacks live in poverty. 2+2=4? Its only a false equivalence if proven false. Otherwise its called logical equivalence.

Is mbtumbe who was born in beverly hills, who went to prep school and its a university teacher naturally more stupid and impulsive than billy bob the wife beater meth dealer?

>My response is that they didn't by my standards
1)Which are?
2)And should supercede the average person's because?

>You were never arguing in good faith.
I'm arguing for fun while in the toilet.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>1661
>In what?
Genetics. I'm not going to say anything else to you. And your nigger fetish is disgusting.

Shame that was good ascii art.

>>1662
You refuse to answer anything like a black man on trial and make no points whatsoever.

I take teh

win

Thank you very much.

>>1556
I wish rap music went back to its roots instead of promoting what they do now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fw0uz88E2gI

I'm not sure about the science of it since it's one of those things that's going to have fudged science on all sides of the issue. So you can't really go off the "facts" since you're just picking facts that already support your kneejerk reaction.

As an idea though? I don't really like them. Every time mankind invents something it seems to result in a great deal of short-term happiness at the cost of long term misery. It's been that way since the industrial revolution. I don't see why GMO's would be any different. They can claim they're safe but how can we know really? Companies are out to make money and if people feel a bit too stressed economically the government will try and kick the ball down the street for the next generation. Borrow from the future so the present won't revolt.

And like >>114 said, we haven't seen any long term studies. They haven't been around long enough, so claiming to know is a bit of a folly.


>>118
It depends on what sort of thing you're buying. If you're going for 100% organic, no pesticides, 100% fresh. Then yeah, it's going to cost tons. If you just pick up say, a bag of frozen broccoli it's usually pretty fair.

Unfortunately you don't know if it's GMO or not since requiring a label on GMO products is some sort of great profit killing evil. If they're so great, so safe, why do these companies shirk back at the thought?

You can also get your food cost really low if you're willing to eat tons of dry foods. Like rice/beans/oats.

GMOs aren't inherently bad because they're genetically modified (we've been selectively cultivating to induce changes over a longer-timespan for millennia), but rather because genetically modifying them opens up lots of downstream consequences:
* It allows crops to now be "patented." We're in the age of DRMd crops, and you can get sued for growing them without a license.
* Knocking our or inducing gene expression in crops can result in a situation where you're presenting the body with a novel compound (or combination) that it has not adapted to handle. This is less of a risk for minor adjustments (e.g. up-regulating or down-regulating expression), but for more radical changes where you're crossing species liens, it's a definite risk.
* Probably the most significant one: "roundup ready" crops just mean that the crops that you end up eating get doused with more pesticide than they used to. Also almost always they end up prioritizing hardiness over nutrition, so what you're eating is tasteless gloop anyway.

I want them to make a GM banana that tastes like banana candy.

>>1645
It's called Gros Michel banana.

>>1619
Life is hard enough for me as it is, more legal requirements making me pass tests every year would just make it worse. I prefer as little involvement from governing institutions as possible. We already have waaaaaaay too many laws on the books regarding automobiles, and everything else.

>>1624
I hate public transport and urban communities. Self driving cars sound like a good idea if they could be made to work.

I'm not sure how well that would work, I think we all know why drink driving is a bad idea but it does not stop people. If anything what stops people are traffic cops and speed cameras, not popular but it works or if nothing else if people do make break road rules they are more likely to get caught doing it and lose their license.

>>1627
I suspect people only know it's bad in abstract, and don't really see how specific actions could lead to specific consequences. But then, I really don't understand people; it seems inherently obvious to me that driving inebriated is asking for death.

If people can't be taught then maybe more/better enforcement is a better solution. Though in general I think that just incentivizes people to get better at breaking the rules.

>>1627
>I hate public transport and urban communities.
Do you really, or do you just hate the blacks? It's two issues, not one.