houseoftolstoy @[email protected]

What really gave it away was the same politicians who were against the "Trump vaccine" were suddenly onboard with the exact same mRNA bullshit once they secured power for themselves. Anyone who was properly paying attention should have caught on to the inconsistencies.

In fact, Trump supporters showed that they thought for themselves more than the "you're in a cult" faggots when they booed Trump for promoting the clot shot.

Another thing, I recall in the early days of the vaxx being released the pathetic psy-op that was "we are giving non-whites the shots first! You can wait in the back of the line to get your shot, whitey!"

Meanwhile, anyone who was already suspicious was not going to worry about who would get priority in taking that poison, but rather correctly assessed that there was no rush to get the clot shot. In the end, they wanted to force everyone to get the shot, so the theater was just stupid.

Doing my recon on state propaganda NPR, they are bringing up how "complicated" it is to figure out who and who does not need Covid "vaccines." Here's a simple answer that those faggots will not say: no one needs or should have them. And if you argue against that, I guess you can go ahead and get boosted. Because I cannot save you if the shots indeed are meant to kill or shorten your lifespan.

https://youtu.be/hNJ2zLbMuq4?t=1080

Perfect example of a TradCon who does not realize that he moved with the Overton Window when talking about universal suffrage. The idea that we should be more restrictive overall with who should vote does not cross his mind (not just women). Also, a great example of someone who does not have equality as his most critical value just accept a lot of the talking points from those who do value equality (not uniquely him but an example).

@ButtWorldsMan >"No" says the man on 4chan "flat is justice"

My sides.

@deprecated_ii The gay men who are getting and spreading AIDS are not just "randomly" screwing other men. They are all usually a part of a circle of other gays and very promiscuous within that circle. The odds of getting AIDS is indeed extremely high if you opt in to this hedonistic lifestyle that many homosexual men partake in, despite the propaganda that "they are just like straight people but they just love those of the same sex."

@JSDorn @Ottovonshitpost Regardless of the specifics, if women want to be treated like they have agency, they need to understand she is culpable for choosing to stay with a man who was not willing to give her the level of commitment she wanted.

The vast majority of these commitment problems cease to be a factor when women reserve sex only for their husbands. A man who is only interested in sex is not going to be willing to hold out until marriage. This allows a husband to be found more easily.

@WashedOutGundamPilot And far be it from me to say "it is no big deal." In a way it is. But not in the way that many young men think. It becomes something to be far less anxious about once you experience it, and it still is a strong biological urge. And that biological urge is far more consequential to the young men who perceive themselves as missing out, and it can wear on them for sure.

@WashedOutGundamPilot It is not just about sex, as many men would just seek prostitutes if they were only about getting sex. They want something more, such as a loving relationship and a family.

Sex is just a highly emphasized benefit that many young men see as a major deal, since they are young and horny. Yes, sex feels great, but it is not the only thing worth seeking. Though if you are one of the sexless young men, it feels like an unquenchable thirst.

@WashedOutGundamPilot Being a married man definitely has made my outlook far different than when I was single. That is, I am able to see the world "from the other side" instead of wondering what it would be like to be married and have that be a major part of my life.

While you do find out that it is not as different as you thought it might be, you no longer have the thoughts weighing you down about what it will/would be like.

For young men who want that but can't have that, I am sympathetic.

@merchantHelios I am guessing this is not about Usopp being "black," but someone else who should not have been, correct?

@sickburnbro >wealthy

Reversing the cause and effect here.

>innovative

Evidence needed. I never see any other than empty assertions.

>culturally rich

Name one thing other than "muh food."

>cohesive

Wow no! Quite the opposite.

>tolerant

Only due to some assholes using more police so that the "tolerance" can be forced on everyone.

History tells us that diversity brings far more destruction and war rather than peace and stability.

@shortstories indeed, I do approve of his ideas in being for no government, as well as his understanding of governments being entirely about the use of force (especially in terms of war).

Most likely, we would never see his ideas work in practice, given that on a large scale any society that has no government often has it overtaken someone else willing to enact control. But I can appreciate his principles to the extent that it falls under the "less government" umbrella.

Whenever there is a bad outcome as a result of someone else's decision (often a politician or other member in power), I do not give a free pass to those who had supported the decision maker just because "I didn't vote for this" or "it was not me who made that call."

Rather, I ask the question: if it was you who was in charge, would you have made different decisions? If you would have made the same choices, then how can your proclamations have any validity?

@shortstories Any atheist who complains when Muslims are as oppressive as they made Christians out to be gets no sympathy from me. This is the bed they helped made, after all. Not saying they are solely responsible, but if they were fully at the wheel of control, would we really have a different outcome?

@shortstories The way I see it, the rise in number of Muslims in western countries is just a consequence of the abandonment of Christianity in those countries. Perhaps not directly, but it most certainly is the case that those who are less religious have less children overall. And along with that, many Christians sects have been eroding the very values that made them Christian in the first place.