I think you're right

I think you're law enacted by congress

They don't Know how they're speaking they just want free stuff

haha but it is the way of the jew to speak with double meanings and retreat to the safe one if he's called out

articulation or even consciousness of their argument shouldn't stop one from considering it coldly

that is true

@UOClmao<:yehuda:286647952569532417>

a lot of leftist stuff is simply cover

for jew/lizard/satan

like "brotherhood of man"

its a truism, certainly in many senses there is a brotherhood of man

(((equality)))

but what do you do from there, what do you justify on the basis of that

is open ended unless it is under some other context

like tribe (nationalism) or God

if you read Peter Singer or other older, better utilitarians

you could interpret "brotherhood of man" to be the widest circle of ethical responsibility

i.e. if you happened to see a guy drowning, knowing nothing else, you might throw him a rope

I think that's incoherent

it doesn't give me a reason

ethics is cancer

but if that circle conflicts with a higher ethical circle, you'd stick to the higher circle

well the underlying reason i've assumed is just the Utilitarian "greatest good" thing which is ultimately axiomatic and therefore incoherent

yeah

i'm watching old mormon vids

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4xfuJoj5YI#t=11m8s

look how white and wholesome those kids are

where's exilarch

Thad nationalism

lel

but weren't they all white and wholesome

in 1968

or is that past the peak

they all meaning mormons or americans?

americans, but I guess I meant whites

white media

1968 is when it all went to hell

Pretty sure Mormons didn't let blacks in until the 70s

no, blacks were always allowed to be members of the church

they couldn't hold the priesthood

Theologically they were cursed by Yahweh