What happened to the internet?

[tumppu]

Good luck with trying to compete with God

Considering gods are inventions of mankind, I can beat any number of gods in a 100m sprint or a drinking contest any day.

Also, I do more good every day than all the gods mankind ever imagined on a daily basis.

[zenkai]

1> To paraphrase Penn Gillette; if you need religion to tell you to not do awful things to people, you're an awful person. I'm an atheist, and I rape and murder as much as I want to. That amount is "zero", because I'm not a monster. If you're holding yourself back from doing such things because "God said so", you're a horrible human being and you're one bad day away from destroying innocent people's lives.

2> The law isn't "because society said so". Phrasing it that way is deliberately dishonest.

Look at Endus bringing up religion again.

[Saucexorzski]

I'd go and look at China's methods of state censorship and thought control; in essence, the powerful fear the internet and its ability to rock the applecart and thus suppression is prefered.

Mark my words, by 2030, Chinese style censorship and policing will be the norm in all western states.

what other way is there to fight against hate and intolerance! lol

[Endus]

Look at Endus bringing up religion again.

I'm bringing up the incredibly narrow window of terrible people who tell themselves they're good because they abide by religious commandments, even though they really want to break them. That's not really about religion, at all.

Yes, all people are awful. This is not new.

You are a monster, it just comes out in different ways... like you being passive aggressive, and a bully.

People are horrible, and monsters, we just like to pretend we are not... we are monkeys with top hats, still flinging our shit at eachother.

Maybe you think this little of yourself, but stop pretending your own self-hatred applies to everyone.

Yeah, that is exactly what it is. Law is backed up by society, by each person individually backing up said law, or by tyrannical governments which die either from within, or because they are overthrown. A lucky brutal few can do it for a while, if they act as god with people's lives.

That isn't how law is established in any Western nation, no. It's based on logic and reason and principle. It can be twisted in the way you describe, but so can anything; that does not make it an accurate assessment of current legal structures.

[Themerlin]

I am waiting for social credit.

Many people here need to be banned from traveling, and have their passports revoked. (sarcasm...)

[shadowmatrix]

Meh, if your afraid to say it using your real name then why bother saying it all?

[Topornic]

The Leviathan happened. And it never stops growing bigger. The way is not to try and cage the Leviathan but to eradicate any slightest symptom of it.

The state hates freedom. People hate freedom, because freedom means responsibility. With regulations they know what to do and what not to do. Like cattle.

[zenkai]

I'm bringing up the incredibly narrow window of terrible people who tell themselves they're good because they abide by religious commandments, even though they really want to break them. That's not really about religion, at all.

.

Now you're going into thought crimes. A good person might get tempted to do wrong but chooses to do the right thing. That catalyst of why they chose to do the right thing does not make them evil.

[Endus]

Logic and reason? Everyone is logical and reasonable? Do you get a prize for being using logic and reason? Can't can I get the same prize by taking it from the less powerful?

Is there a reason you're sealioning rather than dealing with my actual post?

[Topornic]

Meh, if your afraid to say it using your real name then why bother saying it all?

Because he shouldn’t be prohibited from exercising his free speech by any law and any police. He might be afraid still because of ostracism but ostracism is justified and right.

[Endus]

Now you're going into thought crimes. A good person might get tempted to do wrong but chooses to do the right thing. That catalyst of why they chose to do the right thing does not make them evil.

I know you're just trying to bait me, but I'll point out your malfeasance to everyone else.

I never mentioned thought crimes. A "thought crime", per 1984, is when your own secret innermost thoughts are, themselves, a crime. Nothing I said had anything to do with that.

You're trying to insert that, to mislead and derail.

[Topornic]

That isn't how law is established in any Western nation, no. It's based on logic and reason and principle. It can be twisted in the way you describe, but so can anything; that does not make it an accurate assessment of current legal structures.

In the legal positivism world there is nothing the lawgiver cannot do. Only in the nature law doctrine there are barriers.

[zenkai]

I know you're just trying to bait me, but I'll point out your malfeasance to everyone else.

I never mentioned thought crimes. A "thought crime", per 1984, is when your own secret innermost thoughts are, themselves, a crime. Nothing I said had anything to do with that.

You're trying to insert that, to mislead and derail.

No, you basically said that people who have a bad thought but don't act on it because of their deity are evil people.

[Tazr]

The extreme left happened, that's what

Actually, EXTREMISTS happened. Period. The vast majority of the time, it is far RIGHT actors that commit violent acts (and who foment violence and hate online) that cause what you're attributing to far left crackdowns on freedom. Without the left, there's be no freedom to lose in the first place. That said, I have no patience for extremists on either side.

The Twin Tower 9/11 attacks were the beginning of this mess. People, under the guise of protection, gave up more and more rights and freedoms, and now we're left only with illusions of freedom. And it's the Republicans (in the US) that are the worst supporters of privacy and free speech (specifically they are very OPPRESSIVE unless you're a right-wing nut or the so-called current POTUS), so to blame it on the left is inaccurate and appalling. Not to say Democrats didn't have their fingers in the (lack of) privacy pie, but the bulk (the fear mongering, the violence, the repression) is right-driven.

[zenkai]

Actually, EXTREMISTS happened. Period. The vast majority of the time, it is far RIGHT actors that commit violent acts (and who foment violence and hate online) that cause what you're attributing to far left crackdowns on freedom. Without the left, there's be no freedom to lose in the first place. That said, I have no patience for extremists on either side.

The Twin Tower 9/11 attacks were the beginning of this mess. People, under the guise of protection, gave up more and more rights and freedoms, and now we're left only with illusions of freedom. And it's the Republicans (in the US) that are the worst supporters of privacy and free speech (specifically they are very OPPRESSIVE unless you're a right-wing nut or the so-called current POTUS), so to blame it on the left is inaccurate and appalling. Not to say Democrats didn't have their fingers in the (lack of) privacy pie, but the bulk (the fear mongering, the violence, the repression) is right-driven.

I actually don't disagree with this. Liberalism is more about freedom of expression but more and going to far left and the far left wants to silence those they disagree with. For some people, everything is a moral question. If you agree with them, you are virtuous. If you don't, you are a monster. People did sign away a lot of their personal friends for the illusion of protection under the conservative republicans during the Bush years. They reason I said extreme left is because most of your social media and the people who run them are leftest and are known to silence those they disagree with.

[Saucexorzski]

I thought we already established pages ago that the attack on free speech is not a left or right thing, it's a "power" thing.

Because of humans being involved, they will blame the side that, to them, currently inflicts the most pain.

[Endus]

You have not wanted to punch anyone in the face for disagreeing with you?

Of course I haven't. Who the hell would do something like that, or even consider it?

You have never lied, or been a hypocrite?

I've lied, but I'd also argue that lying is often the ethical, best option. Like when I was second on scene of an traffic accident; the girl who'd been driving was clearly in shock and saying she was okay. It was easier to lie to her to get her to sit down and stay warm than to tell her the truth; she'd turned her steering wheel into a U shape with her face and it was as bad as you might think. Have I ever lied for unethical reasons? No.

And have I ever been a hypocrite? Not that I am aware of. I stand by my principles. I don't ask anyone anything I'm not willing to do myself.

No, you basically said that people who have a bad thought but don't act on it because of their deity are evil people.

I said people who have bad urges but don't act on them out of fear of divine punishment, those are bad people.

And they are.

They're people who want to rape women (to pick something), but chose to not rape because they don't want to go to hell. Compare that to someone like myself, who'd never want to rape anyone ever and is horrified by the concept. Pretty clear freaking difference.

[Theodarzna]

I thought we already established pages ago that the attack on free speech is not a left or right thing, it's a "power" thing.

Right now it's a Liberal thing, a Neo-Liberal thing specifically as that is the ideology with power, threatened with losing position.

[Saucexorzski]

Of course I haven't. Who the hell would do something like that, or even consider it?



I've lied, but I'd also argue that lying is often the ethical, best option. Like when I was second on scene of an traffic accident; the girl who'd been driving was clearly in shock and saying she was okay. It was easier to lie to her to get her to sit down and stay warm than to tell her the truth; she'd turned her steering wheel into a U shape with her face and it was as bad as you might think. Have I ever lied for unethical reasons? No.

And have I ever been a hypocrite? Not that I am aware of. I stand by my principles. I don't ask anyone anything I'm not willing to do myself.



I said people who have bad urges but don't act on them out of fear of divine punishment, those are bad people.

And they are.

They're people who want to rape women (to pick something), but chose to not rape because they don't want to go to hell. Compare that to someone like myself, who'd never want to rape anyone ever and is horrified by the concept. Pretty clear freaking difference.

Your ego is bigger than Trumps. Im impressed.

[Endus]

I thought we already established pages ago that the attack on free speech is not a left or right thing, it's a "power" thing.

There is no "attack on free speech", not unless you're referring to those attacking Twitter and Facebook and Youtube et al, and attempting to restrict their rights and freedoms. But that's more about freedom of association and property rights than it is about freedom of speech.

- - - Updated - - -

Your ego is bigger than Trumps. Im impressed.

How is any of that a fucking brag?

I don't dream about violently assaulting people over disagreements and try to be a decent person. That's a pretty bare-minimum kind of stance.