RemyBrown

I was an atheist for a long time because I didn't want to worship a god that burned people in hell forever for temporary stuff. He defined hell as departure from god.

Then I realized how many liberals who thought that would want to burn others in hell forever for things like misgendering, any comment they deem as misogynistic, etc (and they still want worship). You see how many trans people and women want men to worship them (trans men want normal men to admire them (aka worship))?

That realization made me realize that is god all loving? No; but he's more loving than the left.

God bless America and God Bless the First Amendment.

Psychology isn't a real science

Facts.

Oh no, that's awful. 🤐

Well, that's why you should put your ego in check.

Speaking of 2028, who do you think will be the Republican nominee for POTUS? Vance?

Don't know yet.

You can say, "Republicans are mentally ill", "Democrats are mentally ill", "MAGA is mentally ill", "Evangicals are mentally ill" (and I'm abbreviating mentally ill because someone got very mad that I referred to the group with flag with (the 5 stripes; all of them are light colors, lasagna style; but they're all light shades of pink, blue, and one white stripe in the middle) as mentally ill. Is it illegal to be mentally ill? No. Is it unethical to be mentally ill? No. So why would they care about being called mentally ill? Is it job access? Because if so, then they would argue that everyone who's mentally ill should have a harder time finding a job; I'm not sure they want to set that precedent. You can say, "being trans isn't a choice.", alright, well being autistic isn't a choice. Not one autistic person I've met cares if you call autistic capitas mentally ill. If you call autistic capitas mentally ill, then nobody cares; not even the aspie. You call a trans person mentally ill, the people who get mad are the trans person and the trans person's family. You call a Canadian mentally ill, and anyone who even knows a Canadian gets mad. The Canadians and the trans have so much indirect power among white liberals; autistics got none. And until you can go to a job application and it asks, "Do you have a disability?" and Aspergers isn't on there, asperger capitas will have zero indirect power (which the trans like to call, "allies").

There needs to be a specific definition for, "mentally ill". I'm thinking a clear definition can be, "Has had the unacted urge to murder someone else in the past year." Then I hope most trans people aren't mentally ill by that definition, I hope most aspies aren't; I hope most bipolar people aren't. By that definition, I wouldn't be mentally ill (and that's just not internet talk).

But someone who has had the urge to murder someone else in the past year I think should be classified as mentally ill.

They don't want Dave Chapelle to get raped, but if he did, then they would have the mentality of, "I won't harm you, but I don't have to help you".

"Good", "Bad", etc are vague terms. I aim to be specific.

It's because the thing that made Trump popular (the attempt at brutal honesty; the pattern recognition style prejudice) is now adopted openly and proudly by the democrat voter base. You see the N word on all major social media platforms pretty frequently. In 2018, if I were to say, "I don't want to live near the blacks", then I get cancelled. Now, nobody will hate me for it.

The democrat party of 2026 is basically the GOP party of 2024. "The Price of Gas is too high" and, "Epstein didn't kill himself". Every other 2016 issue (Roe V Wade, Affirmative Action, N word social acceptability, Reparations, Pregnant men/Chicks with Dicks, Immigration) the democrat voter basically has a Trump 1st term position on (and often more to the right than Trump).

The one exception to that is Palestine; where the democrat voter base has gotten way more pro Palestine; but Israel/Palestine isn't really an issue that most Trump voters care about. The GOP used to be hardcore pro-Israel, but "America first" made them apathetic to Israel/Palestine (America first was a Trump thing too).

It's hard to be energized to vote when you basically got everything you wanted already and Trump can't run for a 3rd term.

The following image is a group of people who will claim to argue that Hasidic should be exempt from the IDF because they argue that, "praying is their version of helping Israel fight against Palestine."

Are the Hasidics in America anti Israel while the Hasidics in Israel pro Israel? If so, then why do Hasidic areas look like this:

The 2024 Election at a Precinct Level - VoteHub

@SideWalker

Or we can reject the authoritarian rule of the billionaire class and fight against it because it exploits the needy. 

All work is exploitation. But it made your Starbucks latte possible, so enjoy it.

Fact is Pumpkin, you need to pull yourself up and out of the trailer park

If I'm poor, then I'm trailer trash; if I'm rich, then I'm out of touch.

Of course, it’s that mentality that made you the underbelly of society in the first place, you just want to blame black people for your lack of success.

Yawn.

No shit Sherlock, I know what the Gini Index is, and I know it’s not about the country’s economy; it’s about income or wealth distribution within the country’s economy. 

Yes; and Norway's is equal to Pakistan's.

Everyone could be a billionaire...But of course everyone can't...Such is the angst of under achievers.

Democrats are envious people.

@SideWalker

The top 1% owns 32.5% of the nations wealth.

That's doctors, lawyers, engineers, actuaries, etc; people that earned their wealth. Look, in a whole foods store with 500 people in it, 5 of them are in the top 1%.

The billionaires didn't need that trillion dollars, the people who lost their health Insurance and SNAP benefits needed it.

If you take issue with it, then have your state expand Medicaid funding on it's own. Butt none of them picked up the slack; they just want to blame Trump for stuff.

The bottom 50% (roughly 66 million families) hold only about 2.3% to 2.5% of the nation's wealth. 900 U.S. billionaires own significantly more wealth than half of the country combined. The top 1% (1.3 mm Households) owns fourteen times as much as the bottom 50% 66 million households)

This is irrelevant because GINI coefficients don't imply economic success; Norway's GINI coefficient is on par with Pakistan's. Pakistan is a shithole.

The left claims billionaires "run out with all of the money".

Just 3% of the nation's wealth is owned by billionaires.

@SideWalker

In general, prejudice is morally wrong because it results in unequal treatment.

Where are the exceptions? When the left does it, THERE is the exception.

Exactly. Preference = Discrimination.

Look, Rage Bait = Right wing opinion.

Rage Bait is fine.

 I really can't come up why a reason that racial/gender/anything profiling for the sake of personal safety would be morally wrong in and of itself if it doesn't involve harming the other person. 

Careful; you don’t want to come across as a bigot.

This is sarcasm, non violent bigotry should be encouraged.

Honesty is good.

Well for example if a woman stares at a man its not strange/weird but if a man stares at a woman it is strange/weird? How does that make sense?

Because the world is bigoted; just accept that you're bigoted and understand the word means nothing anymore.

I'm a bigot; I'm not dating someone if they're a man. Being a bigot isn't bad.

but then we ask what makes a man strange and what makes a woman strange

The fact that they're strange.

I would be with a strange woman but definitely not a strange man

You're talking to a strange man.

All preferences are bigoted. Bigotry isn't bad.

Preference is a euphemism for bigotry.

Being all over the place counts as being moderate.

Anyone who would rather be with the strange woman than the strange man in the woods is a sexist.

If you try and say, "It's a preference", then I'd rather be around whites than around blacks; it's not racist; it's a preference.

When the right discriminates, it's bigotry; when the left discriminates, it's a preference.

No consistency, but the left can't be consistent because of their pride/arrogance.

Self righteousness doesn't prove righteousness, often just proves arrogance.

Which is pride (#1). It doesn't need to be justified to the holder; they're too emotional to justify themselves and deal with right wing scrutiny.

Whereas moderation suggests balance.

If there are 2 policies:

1. Ban murder
2. Ban rape

Then a moderate isn't anti one and pro the other.

This isn't the same as political policies, but the only genuine moderates with political policies are the curious ones (people like Savant are an example).

Give Savant 5 yrs, he might become conservative by today's standards.

@SideWalker

Bragging about the belief that you're righteous is prideful; hence you're #1.

You're #2.

It means that I was curious and got many of the answers. Side Walker has pride. I don't.

1. Prideful leftists
2. Curious Moderates
3. Honest rightists

Which one are you? Everyone already knows who they are. I'm #3.

People don't believe in anything, they don't have logic in any of their actions. They just believe whatever gives them funny feelings in their tummy.

So then society has become more honest by saying that a society that values logic is dead.

The definition of "stupid" has changed from, "low intelligence" to, "anyone who the left disagrees with on geopolitics". With this new definition, stupidity is good; it just means anti-establishment at this point.

Alberta had a referendum. The separatists lost.

Every government policy can be left to the states (ex: Alberta could maintain Medicare for all if it wanted too). Albertans didn’t care and they chose to remain in Canada.

The reason? The age of logic is over. Everyone is emotional now.

Emotional people don’t care about what’s practical; but they care about their IDENTITY.

This is for all races and all political parties. It’s why Canadians refuse to become American despite it being objectively logical; EMOTION (and they will often deny it being emotional, but that’s their emotion talking; identifying as emotional feels really bad).

It’s why men try and have sex without the desire to have a kid; EMOTION.

Its why people here think I Rage Bait; their EMOTIONS control their mind, so they make up a scary word to dismiss me.

It’s why people debate on here and may lie and say they changed a few issues on here, they almost never jump party. Obama will never be a Republican. Trump will never be a democrat.

EMOTION makes people think a certain way, logic may be used to justify after, but without the emotional spark, logic is useless.

Therefore, the only reason why people on here debate is they think it’s fun until the other side produces a witty argument they can’t refute, then they get very mad inside because the emotion can’t make them see the other side.

The age where logic works on people for political opinions they have is dead. Logic can be used for problem solving; but it can’t work in changing minds politically (except for immigrants who are new here and seem pretty unchangable once they voted red and Trump deported them regardless). Minnisota has very few immigrants; it’s voted pretty consistently over the past 40 yrs; always slightly blue.

But it takes an emotional shock to get someone to switch parties; logic doesn’t do it.