yes, when people say furry they're talking about the subculture

yea, alot of kids loved zootopia, most of the sales were families, you cant say entire families are furries lol

Right, but it was said that furries were degenerate just like loli and shota, and I just don't think a film with loli and shota characters would be quite so popular among family and youth, which I why I was confused by spypenguins use of the term furry alongside loli and shota. I thought he was talking about characters, not loli and shota subcultures.

i think he meant that furries have a very disturbing side to them like loli and shota, like a sub culture to a sub culture

Dont know if I would compare those two tbh. Furries have disturbing side to them, i agree here, but that is only side. For loli/shota it isnt only side when whole community is concentrated around disturbing content

there is the discord fiasco, where servers that had loli shota also had underage dating

but again, wed need to find out how related this stuff is. is it like with furries where other furries KNOW other furries do fucked up shit? do loli and shota people know other loli shota lovers do fucked up shit?

cause most of the degenerate furry stories come from other furries. REEEE DEBATE TIMER

Can you point to the non-disturbing side of loli/shota?

i think its all disturbing, furry and loli lol. im referring to what tolerance the communities have with criminal activity. like furries sound the bells when furries talk about having sex with animals

I would say that the fact there's a side of furries who call out and denounce disturbing parts of their fandom would suggest there is a side that isn't inherently disturbing... unless you think it's disturbing or a bad thing that they point out criminal activity.

i hang out in the kiwifarms where that stuff is archived, its always other furries with the juicy info

Naturally

though with pedos, they usually self announce and thats when they get attacked and archived

its not generally the loli/shota ppl who hang out in the same discord servers that call them out, so it could be a sign of tolerance, but at the same time that group isnt under heavy political scrutiny like the furries are.

sorry, I was comparing them both as degenerate I thought that was clear but I guess not

they are lol. i think i looked 2 far into what you said

This: https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/strange-paradoxes-race-environmentalism-immigration-gulf-between-rhetoric-and-reality/

trump is bad prove me right

ORANGE MAN BAD

<:NPC:500042527231967262>

His orange skin is the worst part really

At this point, if he changes it, they win. So he's orange for the rest of his life.

I really wonder if oranges have sold less since orange man took office

Getting Scurvy to own Drumpf

Oi, I have a topic.

Modern societal understanding of love has evolved into tolerance and acceptance. Whereas historically society has used the term as a measure of respect.

Term Respect does not equate to love(romantic context) but love does equate to respect. It is true that most people use love for replacement acceptance and love(friendly context). How ever I feel this is a misuse of language and it should be avoided.

Trump is the orange to this country's scurvy

Love is the desire for what is best for an individual. A parent disciplines their child out of love, even if the parent does not respect the child or tolerate their actions.

Ehhh, love is just bonding. People do what they think is best for those they bond with because bonding ties their psychological well-being to the well-being of those they bond with. Bonding can be accompanied by respect, but ultimately that's a matter of the individuals morals and how they believe they should act around those they love.

the greeks belived there are different types of love and had different names for them

the most common one people associate with love now days is eros, which is romantic love

Then theres philos, agape... maybe some more idk.

That was before a scientific understanding of oxytocin though. If I had to compare their concept, I'd say the Greeks were talking about moral reactions to the bonding hormone.

Do you think it is possible that Donald Trump could have his national emergency determined unconstitutional? general question

I'm not sure... that's a tough one. I don't know what limitations the constitution has on emergency powers. As far as I know, there's not a hard limit.

Yeah, it's one of those perfectly undefined grey areas, seemingly

It's very difficult to judge in a totally unbiased manner since this is such a unique situation and there's no legal precedent.

I have my doubts the supreme court will consider his national emergency unconstitutional. There's too much info to back him up. Even if it's not a major emergency, one could easily consider the amount of illegal immigration and the harm it's doing an emergency, and then there's not a constitutional statute being broken by him having a slightly skewed opinion of the situation. He's still acting to prevent harm to the nation, which is within his duties as president. It'll likely get a 5 to 4 vote in his favor.

it is possible it could just scrape by...
main thing im concerned about is what it could mean for him if it does get blocked and he loses the wall

beyond not getting the wall, which is already an awful thing, it would certainly hurt his chances in 2020