Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Verbatim

Pages: 1 ... 404405406 407408 ... 1601
12151
The Flood / Re: oh shit son
« on: November 25, 2016, 03:19:28 PM »
So what is your argument right now
That it is possible to be anti-slavery while still being a slave owner.
Compelling
Extremely, if you're capable of thinking logically.

12152
The Flood / Re: oh shit son
« on: November 25, 2016, 03:17:35 PM »
So what is your argument right now
That it is possible to be anti-slavery while still being a slave owner.

You can still be a selfish cunt and malign yourself for it.

12153
The Flood / Re: oh shit son
« on: November 25, 2016, 03:13:16 PM »
Except this is shitty and hypocritical too
No one said it's not hypocritical. Just that there's nothing logically fallacious about being a hypocrite.

Thinking so is a fallacy in itself.

12154
The Flood / Re: oh shit son
« on: November 25, 2016, 03:11:56 PM »
The constitution was written by white landowning men for white landowning men. Everyone else can fuck off.
Not really. There's a reason tyranny of the majority was such a feared concept in the founding fathers' mind. They were looking out for all races, and nearly all of them opposed slavery.
Right. That's why women couldn't vote and why counting niggers as three fifths of a person was a compromise.
Right, because the founding fathers weren't the ones with all of the power. Washington, Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton, Burr, etc all opposed slavery and felt that minorities deserved all the rights of whites. But they didn't comprise all of congress, and the vast majority of congressmen were conservative southerns or southern sympathizers.

Now, all of the founding fathers but Burr were male-focused, that's where you're right. But I'm more talking about race.
You can't be anti-slavery and a slave owner.
Why not?
Because actions actually have consequences and meaning in the real world
That doesn't mean you can't be anti-slavery and a slave owner.
What reason would you have for telling everyone else to give up their slaves while you keep men chained up for yourself
Maybe you're just a selfish cunt who realizes that you're doing is wrong, but you don't do anything because you're a selfish cunt.

12155
The Flood / Re: oh shit son
« on: November 25, 2016, 03:07:58 PM »
The constitution was written by white landowning men for white landowning men. Everyone else can fuck off.
Not really. There's a reason tyranny of the majority was such a feared concept in the founding fathers' mind. They were looking out for all races, and nearly all of them opposed slavery.
Right. That's why women couldn't vote and why counting niggers as three fifths of a person was a compromise.
Right, because the founding fathers weren't the ones with all of the power. Washington, Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton, Burr, etc all opposed slavery and felt that minorities deserved all the rights of whites. But they didn't comprise all of congress, and the vast majority of congressmen were conservative southerns or southern sympathizers.

Now, all of the founding fathers but Burr were male-focused, that's where you're right. But I'm more talking about race.
You can't be anti-slavery and a slave owner.
Why not?
Because actions actually have consequences and meaning in the real world
That doesn't mean you can't be anti-slavery and a slave owner.

It's no logically different than a smoker being anti-smoking, or a meat-eater being pro-vegan.

12156
The Flood / Re: oh shit son
« on: November 25, 2016, 03:02:17 PM »
The constitution was written by white landowning men for white landowning men. Everyone else can fuck off.
Not really. There's a reason tyranny of the majority was such a feared concept in the founding fathers' mind. They were looking out for all races, and nearly all of them opposed slavery.
Right. That's why women couldn't vote and why counting niggers as three fifths of a person was a compromise.
Right, because the founding fathers weren't the ones with all of the power. Washington, Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton, Burr, etc all opposed slavery and felt that minorities deserved all the rights of whites. But they didn't comprise all of congress, and the vast majority of congressmen were conservative southerns or southern sympathizers.

Now, all of the founding fathers but Burr were male-focused, that's where you're right. But I'm more talking about race.
You can't be anti-slavery and a slave owner.
Why not?

12157
Serious / Re: And here we... go!
« on: November 25, 2016, 02:31:52 PM »
Reminder that this 9/11 truther, nuclear power skeptic, and "wi-fi gives you cancer" believer was STILL the best candidate in the election.
But this doesn't make sense, nuclear power has almost zero emissions, it's the cleanest and most efficient energy source we currently have (that can actually power a large country, so wind and solar don't yet count) by a long shot. The only reason someone could be against nuclear is if they actually don't know how the tech works and thinks it's just like a nuke. That or more out there theories, but the point still stands, nuclear is green as fuck.
And she was STILL the best candidate in the election.
>not spiderman
>not hitler
>not anyother joke candidate with just as much a chance of winning
k
Winning wasn't the goal.

12158
Serious / Re: And here we... go!
« on: November 25, 2016, 02:22:20 PM »
Reminder that this 9/11 truther, nuclear power skeptic, and "wi-fi gives you cancer" believer was STILL the best candidate in the election.
But this doesn't make sense, nuclear power has almost zero emissions, it's the cleanest and most efficient energy source we currently have (that can actually power a large country, so wind and solar don't yet count) by a long shot. The only reason someone could be against nuclear is if they actually don't know how the tech works and thinks it's just like a nuke. That or more out there theories, but the point still stands, nuclear is green as fuck.
And she was STILL the best candidate in the election.

12159
Gaming / Re: I love shilling for Halo 4
« on: November 25, 2016, 01:53:39 PM »
didn't realize how old that post was, w/e

12160
Gaming / Re: I love shilling for Halo 4
« on: November 25, 2016, 01:53:06 PM »
Halo 4 was fine, you guys are overreacting. Good Campaign - Terrible Multiplayer = Okay Game
Calling that abomination and disgrace to the franchise an "Okay game" is an insult
Overreaction.
Halo 4 a shit

343 a shit

Halos 1-3 are the only Halo games
Overreaction.
Take your L
Damn dude

You're really dense
First time talking to Jno?

12161
The Flood / Re: Dietrichsix
« on: November 25, 2016, 01:36:21 PM »
I actually enjoyed battlefield earth. The book was better, obviously, but I liked the direction they went.
when you were still learning how to SPELL YOUR NAME...

12162
Gaming / Re: Pokemon Thread (Massive Spoilers Page 49 and Beyond!)
« on: November 25, 2016, 01:06:22 PM »
fucking castform so fucking hard to find

fuck SOS exclusives

12163
The Flood / Re: As godawful as Attack of the Clones, and Halo 5 are...
« on: November 25, 2016, 12:58:09 PM »
>Plot Holes The Movie
>Good

Pick one.
Still better than Empire.

12164
Serious / Re: And here we... go!
« on: November 25, 2016, 11:56:31 AM »
Reminder that this 9/11 truther, nuclear power skeptic, and "wi-fi gives you cancer" believer was STILL the best candidate in the election.

12165
The Flood / Re: what the fuck cheat
« on: November 25, 2016, 11:34:06 AM »
Report button is pretty much there to lock your own thread, or to turn yourself in to the Sep7agon police.
are you missing the point of this thread

look at the purple line

it should be straight
it doesn't work like that

the buttons are in a set order: Like, Report, Edit, Reply, Quote

you can't edit other people's posts unless you're a mod, so for anyone but mods, the "edit" button is removed
you also can't like your own posts, so for all posts but your own, the like button stays

the order literally doesn't change at all; certain buttons just get removed depending on your perspective

12166
The Flood / Re: As godawful as Attack of the Clones, and Halo 5 are...
« on: November 25, 2016, 11:20:49 AM »
>circlejerking over conventionally shitty movies

HAHA YEAH WOW I SAW BATTLEFIELD EARTH THE OETHR DAY, IT WAS SOOOOOOOO BAD xDDDDD

I HAVE THE SAFEST AND MOST AGREEABLE OPINIONS EVER, PLEASE VALIDATE ME

12167
The Flood / Re: Yet another Death Star hurray
« on: November 25, 2016, 01:35:18 AM »
This community is not very active.
At 2 in the morning in a predominantly American website? You don't fucking say.

12168
The Flood / Re: what the fuck cheat
« on: November 25, 2016, 01:23:45 AM »
why can you even report yourself anyways
Sometimes I report my own post if I want a thread unlocked, or if I just want to send the mods a lovely little message.

12169
The Flood / Re: Silence trailer (new Martin Scorsese film)
« on: November 24, 2016, 11:55:10 PM »
YouTube

12170
Gaming / Re: Pokemon Thread (Massive Spoilers Page 49 and Beyond!)
« on: November 24, 2016, 04:30:21 PM »
The story just swerved into a really weird direction.

REAL Spoilers
- Lusamine was revealed to be an evil, crazy bitch (surprise, surprise).
- Lillie and Gladion are revealed to be her children--Gladion himself is working against her.
- Guzma has been working for/with Lusamine all along.

So, what about the rest of Team Skull? Are they in cahoots with Lusamine as well? What about the Aether Foundation? Faba's clearly evil, and Colress is hiding somewhere in the background--but what about all those low-level grunts? Do they know nothing about Guzma and Lusamine's plans?

What about Wicke? Why does everybody still trust her if she works for this evil, fucked up organization?

And what the fuck happened immediately following the manifestation of the Ultra Beasts? Hala had an encounter with UB02, and Tapu Koko intervened--but as soon as I traveled back to Iki Town, everything was back to normal.

And why exactly was Gladion working for Team Skull anyway?

12171
The Flood / Re: cultural appropriation
« on: November 24, 2016, 02:33:45 PM »
serious question, do you actually have any values you hold beyond anti-natalism and snarking at people? Not even taking the piss here, just curious.
Veganism. I would say ultra-leftism, but I'm honestly much less of a leftist as I am just anti-alt-right.

12172
Serious / Re: Should the US abolish the Electoral College?
« on: November 24, 2016, 02:23:10 PM »
We're a Constitutional Republic.
That sounds edgy! Your idea is stupid and wrong because it's edgy!

12173
The Flood / Re: cultural appropriation
« on: November 24, 2016, 02:21:41 PM »
Historical accuracy is important because then we have dip shits running around thinking Angelica Schuyler really did lust after Hamilton.
so instead of allowing artists to express themselves however they want, we should just cater to idiots

12174
The Flood / Re: cultural appropriation
« on: November 24, 2016, 02:20:25 PM »
But you're clearly not trying to destroy cultures since your worried about them being diluted.
I'm not worried about shit. It's just that when I see white people wearing chains, talking "black," and calling each other "nigga," it makes me want to shrivel up and die because I cannot handle the cringe.

Quote
2) The fact that you're trying to protect cultures from harm means you value them and think that they deserve to be protcted, hence sacred.
Nope, I don't care at all. I just hate people and I hate when they make fools of themselves--and cultural appropriation is one of the many ways in which people make fools of themselves. That's it. I hold no culture sacred whatsoever.
Quote
QED.
Kill yourself.

12175
Serious / Re: Should the US abolish the Electoral College?
« on: November 24, 2016, 02:09:35 PM »
This ain't a democracy anymore
It never was.
What is it then, edgelords.

"A republic"?

That's a form of democracy.
One of the shittiest possible forms, being the implication.

It's absolutely not a true democracy, though, and it doesn't matter how "edgy" you find that.

12176
The Flood / Re: cultural appropriation
« on: November 24, 2016, 02:06:41 PM »
"Culture is inherited
Never said this.
Quote
sacred
Nothing is sacred.
Quote
non-transferable
Nope.
Quote
and needs to be protected.
Never said that either.

Just that you're a shithead if you try to appropriate someone's culture without trying to understand it.

No cultures need protection, though. You can do what you want. But I should be able to call you a fucking dumb cunt.
Quote
But race doesn't exist lol"
Race DOES exist. It's just a social construct.
Quote
Stunning lack of self awareness there.
Nothing I said demonstrates that I lack self-awareness.

12177
The Flood / Re: cultural appropriation
« on: November 24, 2016, 01:52:22 PM »
>The more inaccurate the song is the better it is

This is a tragedy, to both music and history.
Caring about historical accuracy this much is pretty fucking dumb--especially when it's not TRYING to be historically accurate.

that said i have no idea if hamilton is trying to be historically accurate

12178
The Flood / Re: cultural appropriation
« on: November 24, 2016, 01:44:48 PM »
And yet you'd still be a moron for getting your panties in a knot over somebody who's trying to embrace your culture and not insult it.
Except they're not embracing it--they think they are, but they're not. And that's what's so horrible about it.
Quote
Or just ignorance.
Which is a form of mockery.
Quote
Then you're the kind of moron I'm referring to.
This means nothing coming from someone as pants-on-head fucked in the brain as you.

12179
The Flood / Re: cultural appropriation
« on: November 24, 2016, 12:59:40 PM »
Or, y'know, somebody who is genuinely interested in that culture and wants to see what it's like. It's pretty obvious when somebody is trying to mock a culture and when they're merely curious about it.
It's also pretty obvious that you don't have to be intentionally making a mockery of something to be making a mockery of something. There are cultural symbols that have meaning behind them--to appropriate something like that without grasping the meaning behind it would be a mockery, and you'd be a shithead for even attempting to be a part of it.

You're a cultureless swine so I can't blame you for being unable to empathize.

12180
Yes, it is. The "blind" comes from being legally barred from discussing the business. A blind trust isn't some anonymous shadow organization.
yeah, and i'm sure he cares a whole lot about what he's "legally barred" from discussing with his own family

Pages: 1 ... 404405406 407408 ... 1601