Making fun of the left

Trump.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Yes, the right is that stupid.

Love your neighbor!

My neighbors hate me.

If you think this is a strawman, then I literally had a far left ex friend that disassociated with me because I defended desalination plants (she claimed they were racist because Israel did them).

Oh sure, "desalination plants" is why she disassociated with you, you obsession with misogyny, violence against women, and rape were just fine, but desalination is the problem LOL.

Good one. I'll bet you're an incel because of your desalination views too.

"I'm sorry honey, the hatred and violence and rape was fun, but desalination is where I draw the line, it's all over between us, I'll find some other guy to hate, hurt, and rape me, I need a rapist that cares enough about me to not support desalination" LOL

You are a hoot man.

Most women have rape fantasies, so I can believe that desalination plants are more likely to be a deal breaker there.

Most women have rape fantasies, so I can believe that desalination plants are more likely to be a deal breaker there.

I was talking about something you know nothing about, real live women, not A! women, not inflatable women, and not young girls.

"This study evaluated the rape fantasies of female undergraduates (N = 355) using a fantasy checklist that reflected the legal definition of rape and a sexual fantasy log that included systematic prompts and self-ratings. Results indicated that 62% of women have had a rape fantasy, which is somewhat higher than previous estimates. For women who have had rape fantasies, the median frequency of these fantasies was about 4 times per year, with 14% of participants reporting that they had rape fantasies at least once a week. In contrast to previous research, which suggested that rape fantasies were either entirely aversive or entirely erotic, rape fantasies were found to exist on an erotic-aversive continuum, with 9% completely aversive, 45% completely erotic, and 46% both erotic and aversive."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19085605/

AI refuses to support your article.

That was fun to read, kudos

"This study evaluated the rape fantasies of female undergraduates (N = 355) using a fantasy checklist that reflected the legal definition of rape and a sexual fantasy log that included systematic prompts and self-ratings. Results indicated that 62% of women have had a rape fantasy, which is somewhat higher than previous estimates. For women who have had rape fantasies, the median frequency of these fantasies was about 4 times per year, with 14% of participants reporting that they had rape fantasies at least once a week. In contrast to previous research, which suggested that rape fantasies were either entirely aversive or entirely erotic, rape fantasies were found to exist on an erotic-aversive continuum, with 9% completely aversive, 45% completely erotic, and 46% both erotic and aversive."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19085605/

In the unlikely event that you ever actually meet a real woman, I think maybe you shouldn't tell her you know she wants to be raped.

She probably can, and will, beat the crap out of you.

In the unlikely event that you ever actually meet a real woman

Meeting women is how I got oral herpes.

Yin and Yang Remy.

Two sides to all arguments.

You are more often wrong than right by a far margin.

You voted against Trump in 2024. Trump ended up winning two elections.

You were wrong twice. You are showing poor judgement.

Wherein lies the righteous universal authority with the jurisdiction over right and wrong.

As far as we know, there is no such things as right and wrong...Rather, just collective decisions...Very flexible collective decisions that vary greatly.

"There is a right and wrong" 

reflects fundamental human concepts of morality, often seen as innate or divinely given (natural law), but also shaped by culture, personal experience, and perspective, leading to debates in ethics (moral subjectivism vs. universal truths) where some believe morals are relative, while others argue for objective principles, all pointing to right and wrong existing as concepts, even if definitions vary. 

Arguments for Objective Right/Wrong

1. Natural Law: Humans inherently understand basic moral concepts like fairness, suggesting a universal moral law.
2. Universality in Cultures: Despite differences, civilizations share core moral teachings (e.g., don't be selfish).
3. Human Nature: Even those who deny right/wrong often react strongly when wronged, implying an internal moral compass. 

Arguments for Subjective/Relative Right/Wrong

1. Cultural Relativism: Morality stems from societal norms, changing across cultures and time.
2. Moral Subjectivism: Right and wrong are matters of individual feeling or opinion, not objective facts.
3. Perspective: Personal views are shaped by upbringing, beliefs, and environment, making morality subjective. 

The Philosophical Debate

1. Ethics: This branch of philosophy studies right and wrong, exploring if moral principles are universal or relative.
2. Nietzsche's Challenge: Some philosophers questioned traditional morality, advocating for different value systems, but often still within a framework of "good" vs. "bad". 

In essence, while the definitions and application of right and wrong vary, the existence of the concepts themselves is a deeply ingrained part of the human experience, debated across philosophy, culture, and individual belief. 

Yes, conceptually.

But that doesn't address my question.

It may be that we are actually wrong...But who or what actually has the authority to say so?

The authority to determine "right" or "wrong" depends entirely on the 

context of the claim. Different fields rely on different arbiters, ranging from physical reality to institutional power:

1. Scientific and Factual Truth

In matters of physical reality, there is no single human "oracle". Instead, authority is distributed through: 

1. Correspondence to Reality: A statement is true if it accurately describes the real world. Reality itself is considered the final arbiter.
2. Expert Communities: In science, "objective truth" is determined by experts through evidence, logical reasoning, and peer review.
3. Epistemic Authority: We often voluntarily "surrender" our judgment to individuals with superior knowledge (like doctors or scientists), though this trust is conditional on their continued reliability. 

2. Legal and Political Authority

In society, authority is often a matter of procedural legitimacy rather than absolute truth: 

1. Final Courts of Appeal: In legal systems, the highest court (e.g., the Supreme Court of Canada or the U.S. Supreme Court) has the final authority to decide what is legal, regardless of individual opinion.
2. The State: Governments hold a monopoly on "legitimate coercion," meaning they have the authority to enforce rules through laws and regulations. 

3. Moral and Ethical Authority

Moral authority is the most contested and subjective area: 

1. Subjectivism: Each individual may act as their own "moral compass," determining right and wrong for themselves based on personal belief.
2. Cultural Relativism: Standards may be set by the collective principles of a specific culture or community.
3. Religious Doctrine: Many people defer to religious leaders or sacred texts as the ultimate source of moral and dogmatic truth. 

4. The Relational Nature of Authority

Sociologically, authority only exists if it is recognized. 

1. Voluntary Relationship: Authority is a "symbolic relation" where people follow orders or beliefs because they believe it is right to do so, unlike power, which uses force or coercion.
2. Crisis of Authority: In the modern "post-truth" era, many traditional authorities (scientists, teachers, politicians) are being challenged as individuals increasingly prioritize their own judgment or turn to "unconventional" sources like influencers.