Message from @CrowGoCaw
Discord ID: 523637727787221013
Insisting conservatism is a true option for the masses is authoritarian since only way it can be achieved is through authoritarian means.
Working class is relatively more conservative then an awerage intelectual.... so...
besides national liberalism is a big gay that doesn't change anything.
The Bible says nothing about fucking Liberalism
It says plenty thats anti feminist
Christians believe in an objective right and wrong, that indulging in vice is sinful, etc. It is natural for a Christian to want evil to be illegal when its appropriate
The state should support the goal of raising a noble and virtuous generation
Christianity is extremely anti-liberal but plenty of "Christians" disagree calling it outdated or not with the times
mainly due to the holes opened up by reformed theologians and catholic Aristotelians and nominalists
Christians claiming their holy book is outdated <:facepalm:508484035274735665>
A lot of modern Christians display a large about of cognitive dissonance; they claim to believe the Bible, but when it comes to civic life they pretend that God isn’t real and they can decide policy using their own reason
It's called larping
Even larpers are more convincing
Reminds me of the phenomenon where trannies actually make more of an effort to appear feminine than thots
It’s because of nominalism, there is no conception of a female “essence” or “form”, women are merely a collection of traits, so you can become a woman by imitating a bunch of these traits
all the more reason to be apart of neo-platonist gang
No, Neoplatonism is gay too
They have a faulty conception of God
What about Zoroastrianism?
@FreshWholeMilk shut the fuck up liberal
Augustine introduced a lot of philosophical errors to the western outlook
if you want to talk about philisophical errors on outlook can we talk about the river of fire thing from the orthodoxes
The thing about the river of fire being the same as the river of life?
yes
It’s not dogmatic that you have to believe that, but it makes a certain amount of sense
Why should animals have rights?
I know you should nt do nonsensical things on principle but I don't understand the argument from ppl on the right that animal testing expecially cosmetic testing on animals is inhumane
We should use sex offenders for that kind of testing
not joking
instead of animals
Because when they become intelligent and form a society, they won't start enslaving us humans
I advocate for human testing when they have done henious crimes
I mean you don't need to use animals for that when you have perverts that can just as easily fill the same purpose
Jokes aside, most people that say that says because they pity the animal, "think of their suffering"
Or also, in some cases, because they find them cute
The part that I find ppl on the right saying this bothers me
By right I mean JQ-woke right
Most of these people wouldn't mind a genocide on cockroaches, insects etc, even if they are a crucial part of the ecosystem, just because they're ugly and gross
Well, they can be JQ-Woke but not Animal-Woke
humans are biologically more empathetic towards animals than they are towards insects