I’m being courteous

You lot lack any fucking discipline whatsoever. It’s obscene

Discipline
Kinda gay

2/10

Not gay enough

@ThatPreciseBloke Why precisely are pragmatic matters being conflated with ethical matters so often?

Because pragmatism is often conflated with moralism

That’s not even a hard one

Is it that people such as yourself don’t understand what is being discussed, or do you genuinely believe that pragmatic qualm and ethical qualm are the same?

I reckon it is the former.

No I just like laughing at bad claims

I’m not addressing you

And people trying to discuss them

@ThatPreciseBloke If it is the latter, such is a wholly untenable position even from a laymen’s understanding

It’s not even intelligible when taken literally

Idek whats even going on here lol

@unwoundtoast were you saying i was wrong because i called out darops for taking yhe convo out of the original context (being intellectual property)?

While ethical and pragmatist dillemas do cross paths in practice, when one speaks of one in its own particular sense in theory, its fallacious to shut down a topic regarding such, due to the mere possibility of the circumstance being ethically questionable, especially when there is no existing precedent to begin with

Hence my answer to the question of "why are pragmatic and ethical matters being conflated" being, that it boils down to the innate egocentric/narcissistic desire of some individuals to ultimately control of a self serving political narrative, which is unjust

Tl:dr while ethical and pragmatic affairs are conceptually different (thats no question) ethical matters can often become pragmatic affairs given proper circumetances and present conditions...

Idk why that would be a "retarded" outlook (unless one believes every single ethically significant matter will invariably become a pragmatic matter, and i dont necissarily believe that the case...)

And no the NAP isnt required to be collectively enforced involuntary to function, as a verbal mutual agreement wouldnt always necessitate a totalitarian state to back it if said participants are in agreeance...

https://mises.org/library/justice-economic-efficiency

hi

Hey

Semen Stain

You know those in authority have always taught us that we are all different, and unique. If we are so different why are we forced to abide by the same rules. Except them they can make and break what rules they wish. And tell us it's for our own good. They enforce their rules through violence against us who are apparently so different using their dogs and pigs. Why do you all still vote for them? A bullet has my vote, for all of them and their pigs to.

if they come for my guns theyre getting my bullets

Hey

Hello

they wont take our guns

theyll just give em to the commies

bullshit

leftists love gun control

@fennec fox and you..love assault rifles that were never mentioned and have nothing to do with muskets

<:Think_Smart:612614494497275914>

I should carry around a flint lock as a gun law protest

@👑Shah Jake👑 if the second amendment was about muskets then it would be the right to bear muskets. The founding fathers knew that weapons technology would improve in the future.

I don't think the constitution argument is important

Because if the constitution as written wasn't severely altered only white people would be allowed to be citizens

Actually no it wouldn’t

Because technically it being able to be altered is constitutional

Also about gun control
It could be made constitutional but in reality it already exists in some form or another in most state legislatures

The only one I can think of that doesn’t have it is probably Alaska