Due Process =/= break the law and get away free.

One situation I'd support illegals entering the country. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9lVbnCuvio

Use the revenues of this show to pay for their right to become a citizen if they win.

Visitors are extended rights the same way you'd offer rights to someone you invite over to your home.
Illegals are the same as someone breaking into your home.
... we need to grab our guns and start protecting our homes.

Yeah. They were boring and nothing because it was just another jab at the left.
Then the left revealed that it actually bothered them, because it may be true. So now it's exploded.

Oh @MourningMoon : us weebs are a welcoming community, so of course you can count yourself one of us. 😄

my brother is a hyper-weeb, he can't stop drooling over anything anime, no matter how bad it is. I'm just a casual fan of some better shows and occasionally poke at some obscure title to see what it's about.

the whole inner voice thing was considered in various ways and tim did that great vid about it, but more or less it's not quite voices in your head, it's your OWN voice in your head. It's the ability to stop and ask yourself things like, "gee, is hitting this random stranger over the head with a bike lock a good idea? y/n" before you just swing wildly and do it.

The hard facts shift from study to study, you can get different results depending on how you ask the question and what situations you present. There are very clear situations where any normal person doesn't sit there and mentally talk something out because you recognize immediate action is a need.

If you want a good example of what NPCs really are: Watch any of Campus Reform's videos where they go out and poll university students about something that suddenly leaves all of them utterly stumped. They have no idea how to respond, so they give up on the actual question and start spitting out canned lines that sound like it supports their cause, without actually addressing the question.

That's the kind of thing that if they stopped for half a second and actually THOUGHT about it, rather than just their internal programming trying to pick a line at random, they would realize "wow... that does not apply to this situation, and I need to either really THINK for MYSELF, or admit I might be wrong."

Here's a perfect example of it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENN1eeyuLPY

All the NPCs went to this protest to get "Assault Weapons" banned, but their programmers forgot to explain to them what an "assault weapon" is.

Not sure I agree with all those bingo squares. I know I only watched Black Panther just to see how bad it was, and even had a 'polite discussion' with someone here where I explained how they're a bunch of black fascists. The NPC of course, disagreed with me.
The rest are largely in line with what makes an NPC.

top right corner

no, i agree with the obsession one.

but that one I give fault to.

needs to be replaced with something like "Thinks Wakanda is a Utopian Society the rest of the world should strive to be." or somesuch nonsense.

since it's still aiming at the MCU

I'd give another reference, but those movies are such idle popcorn flicks, I scarcely remember anything of note about them. I could recap their stories and scenes, but... like... they're nothing outstanding.

I regret to say, including top right there, that means I hit 3 marks.
I've not created anything of artistic merit. And I actually do believe art can be pedo stuff... though that one is mostly due to unfortunate interactions with both "artists" and consumers of such content.

watching Tim's latest vid about left being angry, loving it. :D;;;

aw shit, I'll get in the robot. And I won't be a whiny bitch about it either.

let's murder us some space aliens that think they're angels or ... whatever the fuck it's supposed to be

<:NPC:500042527231967262>

slightly out of the loop, still catching up on my news: Those bombs, has it been confirmed if they were real, or hoaxes?

@DrYuriMom They don't have anything to do with each other normally... until you take your apple and slam it into the muffler of a car and cause it to stall out. That's what feminism is doing to meritocracy.

Look at that CERN scientist who was suspended after he pointed out that the STEM field is making an active effort to prefer women 2:1, which was confirmed by several studies.

Are you really telling me that FEMINISM giving women a 2:1 advantage, and MERITOCRACY which consistently favors men for being more stable in the field and stronger contributors, are not at odds?

Feminism, as a whole, must be taken into account. What they are doing en-masse. What the WHOLE of the group is considered doing, and how they are impacting society.

If you admit that a large portion of feminists are causing situations like that, then you are admitting that feminism and meritocracy are fundamentally at odds.

If it was just an outlier that society at large ignored and told them to STFU and GTFO, then I'd shrug them off and ignore them. But it's not. Society at large is bending the knee to the temple of feminists and abandoning meritocracy.

I'm refering only and exclusively to your comment about "meritocracy and feminism being incompatible is like saying apples and alternators are incompatible. They have nothing inherently to do with each other."

I have nothing against the 19th ammendment in the initial spirit of it and the ideals it supports. In theory, it supports the merit that men and women can be equal, and are equally deserving of the right to vote.

If something else was said that fundamentally disagrees with my view, you'll have to repost it, because I'm not seeing where this particular line of discussion crosses with feminism vs. meritocracy.

Suffrage was a keystone of the matter due to it being an unequal starting point, which is in opposition of meritocracy, you're somewhat oversimplifying the whole situation though. Feminists of that era believed in a lot more than just the right to vote, even though it was a cornerstone of their rallying cries. And at the time, they rightly needed to be raised up and made equal to men.

How does that have anything to do with modern feminism vs. meritocracy though?

Fair enough. We probably do have the same end point, just alternate opening points of the topic.

or close enough to the same end point, as long as we both agree modern feminism has gone too far and their continued push to take more "rights" is absurd and clashes with the ideals of meritocracy.

Equal access and equal rights. Of course. Meritocracy fully supports that. And 100 years ago, that meant more women needed a leg up. In modern society though, it has, again, gone too far, and now men are very openly being discriminated against.

Meritocracy, at its core, hates discrimination in all its forms. Because discrimination is the act of taking away that equal starting point that everyone deserves in a balanced, merit based society.

XD

Yes, the 10th ammendment, that gives us all the right to go back to Peleolitich caveman times. 👍

What's a false flag this time?

Had to go old skool on that one. 😛

Equal access, yes. Not equal representation.

Modern feminisms are demanding equal representation. That's where my complaint of them stems from, and why I say modern feminists are in contradiction to meritocracy.

@Grenade123 and @DrYuriMom - Yes they did try that. They went a step beyond, they tried it with a computer that specifically was not told the sex or race of any applicants. The amazon bots example was only one of the more recent/more heavily publicized times that this occured.

Rightly so. I'm glad to have you here on their behalf. But don't compare those feminists to modern feminists.

@DrYuriMom I think we're all in agreement here.
Original feminists, original anti-racists, all of the greats. We fully support. Dr. King was an amazing man, and hats off to him.
But just take one look at modern feminists and things like BLM, and you tell me with a straight face that those great people of the past wouldn't look on with disgust at what their actions have been perverted into in modern society.

MLK spoke of sitting down with brothers and sisters of all races at a table of equality... I'd be goddamn honored to even be in the same room as him.

BLM would freaking riot and beat me into a hospital stay if I showed up in the 'wrong neighborhood'.

assuming I lived at all

The problem with women in the military in modern society is that the forced attempts to push for equal representation over equal opportunity has forced the military to REPEATEDLY lower their standards, often to absurd degrees.

Even at my best, I, quite honestly, didn't quite have what it would've taken to join the army. Oh, I am fully sure that going through basic training, I'd cut it eventually. But it'd be a struggle for me.

Modern military though with how many times the requirements have been dropped? I am most certainly NOT at my best right now (due to a few health issues), but I could still accomplish nearly all of the requirements of basic training on the spot.

That... That is why people are unhappy about women in the military.

@DrYuriMom What are your opinions about that?

@DrYuriMom So in other words, you're against the current wave of women in the military, due to the methods they forced to get themselves in?

Well, then I have to fundamentally disagree with you. I believe that the repeated drops in standards just to allow women to join is damaging the military as a whole. I believe that women should've always been allowed in as clearly as men, but that if they ARE joining the military, it's their duty to meet the same requirements that a man would. The requirements should not be isolated by "man" or "woman" they should be "Soldier" requirements. Period.

I'm not saying to not let them join. I'm saying that you should set a clear requirement based on the branch you are joining.

Sure, have a lower standard for talented medical staff, I'm fine with that. But set it equally.

My issue is the universal lowering of all standards just to allow women in.

I never said that at all. I said that they need to fit the standard for their position. And not to adjust the bar by gender, or to universally lower the bar until women can fulfill it.

Thank you @Grenade123 it's good to know someone understands what I'm saying.

@DrYuriMom Then that would be a great bar to set, and all women who meet it, I am 100% in favor of letting join.

what I am against is continually lowering the bar, specifically to make it so more women can join

and for those specific situations, I 100% support finding women who are qualified for the initial stages of the ops, and then giving them necessary special training that may even be on a different tier than male training, to allow for those unique situations. but those ARE unique situations.

Your country, your ideals, your way of life.

@DrYuriMom Damn right. I think we're finally in agreement on that.

oh I fully agree women can handle many awesome jobs, and a strong woman would effortlessly kick MY sorry ass. But that's why I believe that the standards should NOT be lowered.

If the standards keep getting lower, it'll get to the point where I could best some of our soldiers... and that's... BAD. I suck.

Sadness. But stuff like that happens. Although again... Best person for the job. That's crucial to keeping a strong military.

That's why I know I'd never cut it in the military in my condition. And part of why I regret that if it continues to lower the standard... I would soon qualify.

Have not watched those vids, but here's my stance on trans:
I don't recall the exact numbers, but there is an absurd amount of suicide attempts made by trans people above the national average. Even the most passive google search lists the rates on the LOW end as 35%, and the high end marks some studies as as high as 78%.

And while I fully accept that causation does not equal correlation, I will 100% stand behind the fact that any condition that is this closely linked with suicide attempts, is absolutely mental health problem, and must be treated as such.

Bandwagon fallacy does not apply when talking about a legitimate and accepted organization of professionals who have a reasonable understanding and take on the matter.

That being said, if you disagree with the stated professionals, you might call such a statement an https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority
However, do read the caveats as described on the site.

"nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have a demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a similar level of understanding and/or access to empirical evidence."

*shrugs* No idea, but I corrected it.

Yes

Yes it is

Don't get me wrong, if you bought in early and didn't know the shitstorm it was going to be, you can be forgiven, but now? XD

I think trans is a mental illness, but bluntly ignoring it or discrediting it is not the solution to it. For those who are fully invested into it, I can support calling them by their selected gender. For those NPCs who are shovelling all this no-gender or multi-gender zhi ziggy bobado, fuck off.

Scientifically speaking, transgender individuals who've reasonably gone through the process to declare themselves and show they actually stand by their beliefs have had proper scientific studies done and a large variety of their physical attributes, especially brain chemistry, often support that they are genuinely trying to be more aligned with the opposite sex of their genes.

So while I still believe this is a disorder and it needs to be treated, I will respect them.

The same way I would respect someone with PTSD.

@DrYuriMom No, that's not how it works. I know this very clearly, one of my aunts decided to give her two sons those things, and... one of them is so fucked up in the head it's insane, and the other, while being a stable member of society in some ways, has very clearly missed puberty and never going to get it.

I'm against puberty blockers as well for reasons mentioned above. They can be hugely damaging in their own way.

It has a lot of effects

@DrYuriMom I assure you, the effects of delaying puberty aren't that you can just kickstart it whenever you're ready. It doesn't work that way. There is both physical evidence and studies, and I have direct anecdotal evidence (although relying exclusively on that is a logical fallacy).

@DrYuriMom Evidence please, your study confirming this?

The problem is how long you intend to delay it and for what causes. There are many studies that currently exist that all reaffirm that our moden way of growing strongly encourages the body to go through puberty during the late teenage years and to reach full growth by age 20. If you push this off by one year... two tops, then it may not be horrible, but you're talking about starting every child on these drugs at age 13 (or slightly younger) to prevent the beginning of puberty, and delaying this to age 18 (or whatever your age of consent is going to be), all due to the less than 1% of the population that is trans, barring the trans-trenders.

Do you have ANY idea how DAMAGING that would be to society as a whole, and the overwhelming damage it will cause to entire generations?

modern society is pushing this trans shit too far, with the overwhelming number of annoying trans-trenders or non-binary people out there, if you are going to start opening the floodgates to more heavily allow for the suppression of puberty, then you are going to cause a huge spike in the number of children that this will be done to purely based on parental beliefs.

Like those crazy parents that are bragging about how their 4yo is already "coming out" as gay.

@DrYuriMom Okay you have to ignore Jasse for obvious trolling. But my statement still remains.

@DrYuriMom Yes. YES. Fucking YES. That's a sane trans person. If those are the people you're talking about who just want to be the other gender and be done with it, living their life as that. I ... fucking support them.

But that is not the majority of modern Trans

@Jasse Biologically, you shouldn't fuck leftie either and leave your spunk in the bottom of your sock Jasse, but you do that anyhow, don't you? So does that mean you've got a mental illness?

@Jasse Muslims are child rapists by a huge margin too, do you mean to say that being a muslim is a mental illness too?

And Catholic Priests.

I already said catholic priests XD

Yes, school teachers too. They've got a HUGE margin of child rapists higher than the average population.

okay, so according to Jasse, we need to gas all the school teachers, catholics, muslims, gays, trans... and... who else?

well duh

you gotta gas the jews too, how could you not? And 1 clown don't forget.

who else can we gas for Jasse? Let's say... all the germans, just to make sure we don't get any nazis again. And... You know what? Fuck the french while we're at it. And I hate Cuba for no discernable reason, so let's gas all cubans. How about all of California too, for giving us such shit movies as Ghostbusters 2016, they deserve it for sure.

c'mon Jasse, who else? since we're going off the deep end into absurdity, this is fun.

yeah, we can't gas Cat, lesbians are hot. 😛 (Sorry about that Cat, I'm still on my off-the-deep-end rant of strawmanning Jasse)

insert "I'd hit it" here.

@DrYuriMom sometimes once one of these trolls goes off the deep end, the best thing to do is just dive off the edge with them a bit and enjoy the ride, as long as we know we can climb back up afterwards.

He seems to have wandered off and now the conversation has gotten so silly there's no fun left to gain from trolling. Everyone left is sane and we're all probably about on the same side (or close enough it doesn't matter to argue it anymore).

Speaking of. I wonder how Dankula's going to do... doesn't his fine date come up like today or tomorrow?

goddamn it florida man...

So if black people can't be racist, then it's not racist to say "When it comes to black people, I think they're all ugly", right?

I think the only monkey reference that's been apt in recent presidents has been Dubya. He's totally a monkey.

There's always been tribal units, it's just gotten worse recently due to lefties going batshit crazy.

until recently, dialogue and debate has always been encouraged, but modern lefties are against that and regularly encourage "SHUT IT DOWN" over debate.

Dehumanizing has always happened, but when prompted for debate, the right is usually all in favor of it because they tend to have a strong stance on their opinions, being able to cite faults such as the extremely high crime rates in black areas, thus they feel that if you debate them, they'll win.

It's only been the new wave lefties that have broken this cycle and created open conflict over civil (or even less than civil) debate.

Statistics on "nontraditional" (IE non-straight) relations are skewed due to the fact that such relationships have only recently become normalized. That being said, the actual hard statistics tend to show that even if they do have higher rates of difficulty over standard straight families, they're still MASSIVELY ahead of the curve over broken families. And given that the current leftie trends are by and large leading to more broken families and single parent households... I gotta say, everyone who's against same sex parent families is kinda fuckin' stupid.

... really? I... just explained...
Same sex families by modern studies (which are woefully inadequate) tend to be close to, or within a small deviation of straight family dynamics and positivity for the children.
Broken family homes and single parent homes are... DISGUSTINGLY more damaging for children and lead to overwhelming amounts of delinquency, criminal activity amongst the children, lower grades in school, lower job opportunities, the list goes on and on.