tenta

Member
  • Content count

    735
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tenta

  1. To liberals killing a baby while it hasn't been born yet and it's awaiting to be born is not immoral, however killing it shortly after it's born would be immoral and would be murder according to them. So much moral outrage over a distinction which is really just arbitrary. And ofc this is because they are conforming to the status quo. Abortion is obviously necessary in a number of cases, but is something that it doesn't have to get to, banning abortion would clearly reduce the number of abortions, as opposed to making it happen illegally, because then less women would be in the position where they need to do it as they would know it's illegal (or has some kind of punishment attached to it - a punishment to HELP prevent having to do an abortion).
  2. what a low IQ disgusting bootlicker fa***** nig*** you'd have to be to say this, lol I'm pointing out the complete hypocrisy of thinking someone's life only matters after they come out of the womb and you can't address it and I also said abortion is not pleasant for a woman so it should be avoided But keep being vegan to make a 0.00001% difference thinking you're doing the right thing or whatever
  3. Who is saying or implying this? Mind you I am open to the possibility that they are.
  4. So you didn't read the entire post? I am not for simply banning abortion, but for having some kind of punishment or disincentive against it, this includes more access to birth control/better education. And again if it was banned then women would get into situations in which they have to have an abortion at a lesser rate.
  5. A morality is like a diamond, it has no use just by itself.
  6. Let's not ban theft because people will do it anyway? No, it does reduce the number of theft committed. There's no candidate that will ban abortion if they get elected therefore if over 50% wanted it banned it wouldn't get banned.
  7. As if that would justify overpricing food, obviously it wouldn't.
  8. All the companies supporting BLM are economically far right.
  9. not even the title before scrolling down to post this
  10. This was the counter balance to these communities.
  11. Why allow those subreddits on reddit? They were stupid and obnoxious, you could have tried arguing with them but it wouldn't have worked. Now that they're banned those communities will no longer be promoting bad ideas and hate against groups of people.
  12. r/chapotraphouse hated land lords AKA fellow working class people, not realizing that they make more than a third world country landlord and was full of stupid posts like "haha look we've accepted LGBT for longer than the confederacy has existed". r/the_donald was highly racist and nationalist. This is a step forward for reddit.
  13. It's not stage red just because it's violent, he becomes like this because of the negative sides of stage orange and blue.
  14. This is all you need to know about Sam Harris: And yes he doesn't realize that others are just preaching sadism for the "strong" and masochism for the "weak". The "strong" according to him being a privileged billionaire who cannot admit it's not just hard work that caused him to succeed.
  15. One of his videos was posted on the megathread as stage orange/red.
  16. Watch it boy, or else you'll get the banhammer!!!
  17. If you think it's justified, that's okay, but it wasn't self defense at all - even if he didn't pull out his gun while chasing him, there was nothing indicating he was doing anything other than running away after firing the taser, he was just watching him run and shot him, (also the fact that he could be paralyzed by the taser, therefore he should fire if he isn't paralyzed, is not a good argument) see comments on page 8. If you think it was justified, you're arguing that he should be given a death penalty for a previous offense by a cop.
  18. Just because people are exposing this as police brutality and murder, doesn't mean they're saying all cops are bad.
  19. From what I see, the cop that shot him was the one who he attempted to taze while he was running away, so the cop figured that if he was tazed by him, he wouldn't let him run away further and would shoot him, which is bad because you can just report his offences afterwards, or he did it because of panic. If he did it because of panic he should have told himself "I won't shoot this guy if he tries to taze me, my partner is next to me". If he was tazed successfully then the guy could have taken his gun and shot at his partner, that's why he shouldn't have chased someone with a tazer and instead let him run then get other people to arrest him for his offences instead of killing him. Also remember, more importantly, he shot him while seeing that he was running away and not attacking them because he never turned around. But I understand it was a messy situation.
  20. The problem is that he was running away, if he's running away that means that he can get reported and then arrested later on for the offenses committed (the policeman's reasoning was not that he should shoot him to prevent him from becoming a fugitive). Instead of "he's running away and he deserves to get killed for resisting arrest".