Message from @Joe Davey
Discord ID: 779386006494248971
I'm pretty sure calling kilts skirts is a huge insult
🤦♀️ I hope these Americans never meet a Scotsman
What was wrong with the dress i thought it looked pretty good?
There were these crazy inventions called robes in the time of Jesus. Problematic, I know.
Im confused someone explain why it was contriversial to wear a dress?
Harry Styles out here looking like he's about to sue my daughter for not sharing a changing room with him smh
no dip you dumbass
Wouldn't expect anyone to want to watch it but all of what they took out of today's conference was the hair sweat... Jimmy Fallon was the same, this is pathetic. https://youtu.be/YnKgzXwAcWk
> 🤦♀️ I hope these Americans never meet a Scotsman
@❄֍Winter Soul֍❄ I'm a Scotsman lol, it was being sarcastic because of how stupid what they are saying about Jesus wearing a robe (or Chiton) as they call it.
> Im confused someone explain why it was contriversial to wear a dress?
@Joe Davey because women wear dresses, and men don't in our culture. The redefining of manhood in our culture is something to fight against imo
Im kind of torn. In some of them he looks really stupid but it is also kind of stylish from an artists viewpoint. David bowie did it too. But the difference is that Styles is used to push a woke agenda while Bowie only did it to express himself. And tbf it's alright if men want to do that but it was never manly
I don't really know how to articulate my thoughts, sometimes. How is it that a singular group of people (leftists) can be so utterly stupid over such a wide range of subjects? (everything.)
The outrage from cnn is sometimes extremely absurd to the point where its just annoying to be honest, MSNBC and a couple others have their moments as well but cmon CNN tone it down a little
"Whaddo You Meme??" is great. He's more of a Christian apologist than a political commentator, but he and Larry Elder are two of the greatest individuals in the black community. WYM also recently interviewed the black NBA star who refused to take a knee for BLM, and it was glorious.
I like to hope that if I were to somehow meet WYM in real life and I said, "It's okay to be white", he'd reply something like "It's also okay to be black", we'd high five, and get on with our days. At the very least, no violence or screeching would take place.
Imagine slandering a president over occasional typos on Twitter.
How is manhood being redefined? So just because women traditionally wear dresses men wearing dresses is something we should fight against? The world changes and we need to be evaluating our cultural past and see if there were mistakes and seeing as the traditional definition of "manhood" is in some cases incompatible with the modern world we have to reevaluate our prior misconceptions about standard gender roles.
@Joe Davey are you an Atheist?
How is that relevant? Even if i was an Atheist I would still hold the same beliefs since I dont let religion dictate my morality
It's relevant in the fact that obviously you don't hold a standard of morality from a religion, so you shouldn't even be having this discussion, because what you're essentially saying, is that everything you do is based on your own standard which makes every argument to your beliefs wrong in your own mind. As for what religion, what do you believe about God, or even if there is one? It's a simple yes or no answer, and it lets me know whether this discussion would actually be worth my time.
Because if you don't believe in the God of the Bible, then you don't believe in objective morality which means that you've already made a preconception about whether there are actual gender roles, physically, emotionally, or spiritually.
Just like the redefining of marriage that our culture has tried so hard to do to accommodate to the LGBTQ movement
First of all morality is not entirely objective and is subjective to some extent. And me not %100 percent adhering to obsolete religious values does not mean i dont believe in god. A person can be religious and not cater to traditionalist ideas that are not only useless but in fact harmful. As for the "redefining of marriage" this is an essential component to progress as our first "definition" of marriage was wrong.
Well if that moral standard of marriage is said and perfectly made by a holy, almighty, and morally perfect God that created marriage, then yes, marriage is what that said being sets the standard as. "A person can be religious and not cater to traditionalist ideas that are not only useless but in fact harmful." How are they harmful if instituted by a morally perfect God that knows all things and what is best and worst for us? And if they are useless, why would that said morally perfect God put them in place and see to it that they be set for human kind?
Essentially what you are saying, is that what God has put in place for us as human beings and the standard that he has set for us, is utter garbage and should be thrown out just like the trash because we need to adapt to the culture.
Your fiasco here is a clear example of idolatry. You are saying that God is what we make of him and if his standards are old in the culture that they are useless and harmless because they don't accommodate the evil nature of human's hearts to destroy and wreck everything good and holy that that morally perfect God put in place for the best of every human being.
You're disavowing God's very nature. So as I said, this is a waste of an argument, because you believe in the God that you want to, not the true objectively moral God who puts laws and standards for the betterment of humans, not the worsening.
Because what I could say after allowing the LGBTQ+ stuff to redefine marriage and what it means to be a woman or a man, is, lets legalize pedophilia! Because it's part of the culture now and we must accommodate them too! Next murder shouldn't be illegal because the person who is murdering the other person has a good reason to do it and the culture needs to be more progressive to us too!
Progress, tolerance, openness! Let's talk more and let's do less!
I'm sorry for the big essay of sorts, but I hope I made my point clear....
I'd rather do conservatism than talking progressivism.
Dude you are literally making the same argument as Leibniz which is deeply flawed. You are saying thats since god is morally perfect so everything he creates is perfect and therefore this world is completley perfect. This us unbelievebally wrong as there are many things in this world that are not perfect. "he standard that he has set for us, is utter garbage and should be thrown out just like the trash because we need to adapt to the culture." acording to this idiotic logic we should have kept slavery as god created it and why should we through out what god created? Yes god created the world but that in no way stops us from changing it. Change is a part of the world and morality evolves along with society. As for your pedophilia argument I am not saying that every single social structure must change but there are social structures with deep problems that must change.
"You are saying thats since god is morally perfect so everything he creates is perfect and therefore this world is completley perfect." Where did I even assume this?
agreed. clothes shouldn't define how masculine you are
But they do, and that's the issue
I think when it comes down to it, there are certain things that God put in place that we definitely shouldn't change - things like biological sex, the nuclear family model as defined in the book of Genesis, morality as laid out by the Law of Moses and updated by the teachings of Jesus Christ (notice I said updated, not revised or replaced - Jesus came to fulfil certain parts of the old Law, which does not mean he remade it). However, things like fashion, hair color, tattoos, and colored clothing are things that we culturally place on ourselves. Now, I don't go wear dresses in public simply because of what it is connotated to. However, when a famous person like Harry Styles wears a dress, it's not aligning with the drag community as much as it is saying "why are we gendering clothes? I look good in this."
I have no personal desire to wear a dress, but that doesn't mean that men wearing dresses is inherently sinful. And yes, Jesus and the Disciples *did technically wear dresses.* I've been saying this for a while now. There is very few differences between a robe and a dress in all honesty, just like kilts are literally just skirts. If you look it up online, there really is no difference other than the term itself.