New anti-blasphemy rule (effective November 1)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
The Catalyst said:
...
Yes that is true. However if government didn't force war/communism which created decades-long economic ruin then the Hungarians around me would be way richer than they are now, so instead of worrying about 180 euros here or there working for scraps I'd be sitting in a cushy job :s

You're making the classic libertarian mistake of assigning "government" as some kind of sentient alien entity that created itself and enforces itself on hapless humans. Nope. Communism may have been foisted on the Hungarians by outside forces but those forces were human beings too. Then the Hungarians chose suffering rather than rebellion. Human choices with human consequences.

You will realize that the idea of libertarianism is a joke when you accept that we are living in it right now. Right now, as of this second, everyone can get up in the morning and do whatever they please. However the vast majority of people all decide to go along with yesterday's tentative agreement (including enforcement of code breaches) to carry on as per usual because it's generally in their best interests.

The standard reply from libertarians is that the threat of violence is the only thing keeping them from doing otherwise but they can't really explain why they're entitled to the childish notion of operating without limitations in a society that has been built from the ground up on rules and regulations. They figure they were born here and now nobody is allowed to simply kick them out or force them into line.

If they were able to take their ideology to its reasonable conclusion then they would have to ask "Hungary" or "New Zealand" to be allowed entry into the tribal lands only without any rules or limitations (except for the fabled non-aggression principle of course). Inevitably they would be told to piss off back into their canoe and get out of territorial waters.

Stay on tribal lands, accept tribal rules. This applies especially to you since you have gone out of your way to leave your tribe and ridicule them while absent from their lands. In a truly libertarian society they would revoke your citizenship and treat you as a hostile foreigner. And when you tried to go back "home" they would inquire about what part of New Zealand you owned, and finding you owned no land they would tell you that you have no right to be anywhere in the country. Make sense? You can't be on land you don't own unless you have permission from the owners. The only permission you have currently is the permission of the government formed by the people of New Zealand as per your (self derided) birthright. You have the wonderful PRIVILEGE by act of government to navigate unmolested around lands that you do not specifically own without being rousted off at gunpoint and marched into the sea or contracted to serve a master in order to gain temporary permission to exist on his land holdings.

tldr Most libertarians are like spoiled children who live in a habitat created by others but who think they're not even obligated to conform to the principles that built that habitat much less wash the dishes for free or babysit their kid sister once in a while.

p.s. this has become a massive derail. If you want me to debate libertarianism you should create a thread.
 
The Catalyst said:
Leonard D Neubache said:
The Catalyst said:
Leonard D Neubache said:
I can't figure out a better way to explain the destructiveness of libertarians except to say they're like a societal immunosuppressant. Harmless enough when there are no viruses and parasites about but when exposed to biological competition they sap the ability of the host to combat cultural threats to itself.

.

Suffice to say they are always for sale to the highest bidder of endorphins. No matter how totalitarian the Left becomes, if the Right demands more from them in resistance than the Left demands in subservience then the atheist-brand libertarians will choose submission every time, and they will gladly betray or sabotage the Right along the way.

Wouldn't that be more of a criticism of atheism rather than libertarianism?

Also, have libertarians historically been more societally damaging than government?

I absolutely give a pass to practicing Christian libertarians. All five of them.

Your followup question makes no sense. There is no society without government and there never has been. Put three people together and they will begin making rules. If one breaks the rules the other two will leverage punishment against the rulebreaker or expel him. From there everything simply scales up and at some point (about a mere hundred people or so) it simply becomes more convenient to make ass-kicking of scofflaws a full time job and pay someone to do it.

That libertarians believe you can somehow have a society without government is proof positive that they live in cloud cuckoo land. If for no other reason than they cannot provide a single example of it being an effective way to order a group of people larger than a small commune.

Aside, weren't you complaining about being suckered out of 180 euro on the free market just a few minutes ago and spitballing the idea of "threatening to notify authorities of code violations" in order to get your money back?

I get that it's good to have rules or a code for your society. I don't believe it can scale up to a country though, because then it's not "your people" telling you what to do, at that large a scale, the politicians/ruling class might as well be foreigners.

Yes that is true. However if government didn't force war/communism which created decades-long economic ruin then the Hungarians around me would be way richer than they are now, so instead of worrying about 180 euros here or there working for scraps I'd be sitting in a cushy job :s

Stop complaining so much and do something with your life.
 
OscarManheim said:
The Catalyst said:
I get that it's good to have rules or a code for your society. I don't believe it can scale up to a country though, because then it's not "your people" telling you what to do, at that large a scale, the politicians/ruling class might as well be foreigners.

Yes that is true. However if government didn't force war/communism which created decades-long economic ruin then the Hungarians around me would be way richer than they are now, so instead of worrying about 180 euros here or there working for scraps I'd be sitting in a cushy job :s

Stop complaining so much and do something with your life.

Yeah that's probably the biggest reason I left. In Aus/NZ people get really triggered if you complain, they are so sensitive to even the slightest hint of "negativity" or "whining" etc etc, preferring to always be "positive". Which is nuts as there's plenty to complain about. I'm at home here as I can complain to my hearts content and people understand as they do it also :smile::angel:. It's like I can be true to myself finally.

Also it's a misnomer to then say "and do something with your life". You'll(by you I mean Aussies who say this in general) be triggered whether I was doing something with my life or not, so that doesn't really matter. People would be more mad at a successful complainer than a positive loser/dropkick. So it is misleading in a sense. Because so many people in Aus/NZ would say something like that. "Since you're so "negative" or have such a bad vibe and not doing anything with your life it's clear why people don't like you and your life sucks" etc.

People should be more clear about what they mean so I can accommodate them better. For the longest time I was trying to be useful/successful/helpful, and solve other peoples' problems, and discuss things/debate things logically/analytically, or say what I was feeling to try and be open about what I thought. But if someone sat me down 6+ years ago and said "just be positive and pretend like what Anglo people say actually makes sense, I know it's weird but trust me" then my social life would've been a lot easier in NZ :tongue:
 

Mr. Wolf

Robin
OscarManheim said:
Dusty said:

After all the women as pastors, trannies as bishops and a sodomite for a pope. I really needed this infusion. (the three fingers under the right eye is no masonic reference at all btw)

God. Please.

It seems like they're using Netflix as a test-bed to try to determine just how degenerate society has become. There is no other explanation for a show like Gay Jesus, or Big Mouth. I'm not a Christian, but to see the way Jesus and Christianity is mocked is very troubling, and it should be troubling to everyone. But no one really stands up to it, so they keep ratcheting up the degeneracy.

They do shit like this and then wait to see if there's pushback. If there isn't serious pushback, then they just keep shifting the Overton Window. It is interesting to note what they don't mock. If Mohammed were depicted as gay, well that would probably result in some entertaining pushback.
 

Teedub

Crow
Gold Member
Pushing gay Jesus is pathetic, weak, wimpy, 'rule breaking' by pussies. It's been totally acceptable to be an atheist in Western countries for decades, including the coastal areas of the states where I imagine this thing was made. It's not even remotely rebellious. But you know what, I wouldn't respect them if they did Mohammed as gay either. Attacking religion in western countries is low hanging fruit for faggots who think it's 1992.
 

ilostabet

Pelican
To give some context: this show was made by a brazilian 'comedy' troupe, which is staunchly anti-Bolsonaro (who is known to have been heavily supported by the Christian public against the leftist zeitgeist). This was made only to antagonize the brazilian president and the people who elected him: really nothing more. I have no doubt that Mr. Wolf is right and Netflix pushes these things to see how far it can go, but the producers in this case had a very specific target in mind, and it's purely political. In a way it shows how these leftists respect absolutely nothing, they aren't really anti-Christian, they are just vile nihilists, who will use any religious symbol if it suits their purposes - they are exactly like advertisers in that sense. They are selling a product, pure and simple - and their misuse of religious symbols is not really blasheming, is something worse: because blasphemy recognizes the gravity of the symbol, the advertising mind sees whatever symbol as just another one to be used with a selling purpose. Somehow I can respect more the pure hatred of black metal types than this type of dismissive and pointless stupidity. These brazilian guys and their ilk are the lowest of the low.
 

Wutang

Hummingbird
Gold Member
Teedub said:
Pushing gay Jesus is pathetic, weak, wimpy, 'rule breaking' by pussies. It's been totally acceptable to be an atheist in Western countries for decades, including the coastal areas of the states where I imagine this thing was made. It's not even remotely rebellious. But you know what, I wouldn't respect them if they did Mohammed as gay either. Attacking religion in western countries is low hanging fruit for faggots who think it's 1992.

Since you are British, I have a question. Why is the UK such a hotbed for a lot of this fedora atheism? It not only gave us Dawkins and Hitchens as well as minor anti-prophets like Stephen Fry and Ricky Gervais but it seems like a lot of regular English harbor lots of anti-Christian attitudes as well.

I can understand the backlash in the US (even if I disagree with them) since the religious right in the US has actually had political influence and pushed a lot of unpopular ideas. I remember growing up hearing about the dangers of playing Grand Theft Auto, heavy metal, rap music etc. This has been going out in a while as Day of Broken Arrows has described when the Catholic Church was telling people not to go see certain movies.

The influence of religion in England in contrasts seems a lot weaker so I can't imagine what's inspiring the backlash. The Anglican church does everything it can to be as non-offensive as possible and at this point they seem to resemble Shinto in Japan: a cultural backdrop/decoration rather than something that has any sort of power in society. Even Dawkins recalls his Anglican upbringing with a lot of fondness.
 

Enigma

Hummingbird
Gold Member
ilostabet said:
To give some context: this show was made by a brazilian 'comedy' troupe, which is staunchly anti-Bolsonaro (who is known to have been heavily supported by the Christian public against the leftist zeitgeist). This was made only to antagonize the brazilian president and the people who elected him: really nothing more. I have no doubt that Mr. Wolf is right and Netflix pushes these things to see how far it can go, but the producers in this case had a very specific target in mind, and it's purely political. In a way it shows how these leftists respect absolutely nothing, they aren't really anti-Christian, they are just vile nihilists, who will use any religious symbol if it suits their purposes - they are exactly like advertisers in that sense. They are selling a product, pure and simple - and their misuse of religious symbols is not really blasheming, is something worse: because blasphemy recognizes the gravity of the symbol, the advertising mind sees whatever symbol as just another one to be used with a selling purpose. Somehow I can respect more the pure hatred of black metal types than this type of dismissive and pointless stupidity. These brazilian guys and their ilk are the lowest of the low.

I disagree.

This specific comedy group that you're talking about might not be completely anti-Christian in their agenda, as you say, but the elites who run networks like Netflix are absolutely anti-Christian -- and many of them are very into the occult.
 

Teedub

Crow
Gold Member
Wutang said:
Teedub said:
Pushing gay Jesus is pathetic, weak, wimpy, 'rule breaking' by pussies. It's been totally acceptable to be an atheist in Western countries for decades, including the coastal areas of the states where I imagine this thing was made. It's not even remotely rebellious. But you know what, I wouldn't respect them if they did Mohammed as gay either. Attacking religion in western countries is low hanging fruit for faggots who think it's 1992.

Since you are British, I have a question. Why is the UK such a hotbed for a lot of this fedora atheism? It not only gave us Dawkins and Hitchens as well as minor anti-prophets like Stephen Fry and Ricky Gervais but it seems like a lot of regular English harbor lots of anti-Christian attitudes as well.

I can understand the backlash in the US (even if I disagree with them) since the religious right in the US has actually had political influence and pushed a lot of unpopular ideas. I remember growing up hearing about the dangers of playing Grand Theft Auto, heavy metal, rap music etc. This has been going out in a while as Day of Broken Arrows has described when the Catholic Church was telling people not to go see certain movies.

The influence of religion in England in contrasts seems a lot weaker so I can't imagine what's inspiring the backlash. The Anglican church does everything it can to be as non-offensive as possible and at this point they seem to resemble Shinto in Japan: a cultural backdrop/decoration rather than something that has any sort of power in society. Even Dawkins recalls his Anglican upbringing with a lot of fondness.

A combination of various factors I would posit. A very humour driven culture where religion acted as low hanging fruit for people trying to look edgy. A very sardonic and self flagellating type of humour too. A British popstar going on TV awards and thanking God would be seen as pretty odd - even worthy of trite ridicule. Unless they weren't white.

I'm sure other Brit posters can weigh in here.
 

ilostabet

Pelican
Enigma said:
ilostabet said:
To give some context: this show was made by a brazilian 'comedy' troupe, which is staunchly anti-Bolsonaro (who is known to have been heavily supported by the Christian public against the leftist zeitgeist). This was made only to antagonize the brazilian president and the people who elected him: really nothing more. I have no doubt that Mr. Wolf is right and Netflix pushes these things to see how far it can go, but the producers in this case had a very specific target in mind, and it's purely political. In a way it shows how these leftists respect absolutely nothing, they aren't really anti-Christian, they are just vile nihilists, who will use any religious symbol if it suits their purposes - they are exactly like advertisers in that sense. They are selling a product, pure and simple - and their misuse of religious symbols is not really blasheming, is something worse: because blasphemy recognizes the gravity of the symbol, the advertising mind sees whatever symbol as just another one to be used with a selling purpose. Somehow I can respect more the pure hatred of black metal types than this type of dismissive and pointless stupidity. These brazilian guys and their ilk are the lowest of the low.

I disagree.

This specific comedy group that you're talking about might not be completely anti-Christian in their agenda, as you say, but the elites who run networks like Netflix are absolutely anti-Christian -- and many of them are very into the occult.

No doubt about Netflix being seriously anti Christian. I was just giving context to this particular group because being Portuguese I am likely more familiar with Brazilian stuff than most here. These guys mock Christ because it's easy and it pisses off the people they hate, they recognize no profound meaning in the symbol and I doubt they are into the occult like the oligarchs. They are just useful idiots and pointlessly 'irreverent'. They really have no deep convictions. They are NPCs with high IQs like most cosmopolitans.
 

Athanasius

Pelican
infowarrior1 said:
Teedub said:
For those who expressed mild concern, I ditched the Mormons once the hot one moved to a different town. They started talking about the golden tablets etc and felt almost blasphemous and well, weird. Nice people but I shall continue my search. Being Northern European you'd probably point to Protestantism, but it's cucked and eventually leads to atheism. What is Mel Gibson?

Have you checked out the OPC? Or any of the conservative reformed churches?

Of course you should avoid the more liberal denominations.

This is one of the myths out there, that all protestant denoms are cucked. Of course the mainline ones like the PCUSA, ELCA, American Baptists, Episcopals, are 98% gone, with only a few faithful oldsters here and there. And you have the faithless shepherds pushing the woke and egalitarian stuff (e.g. Gospel Coalition), the prosperity gospel (Osteen, Copeland, Joyce Meyer), and watered-down stuff like Hillsong. But there are a tremendous number of faithful denominations and churches-- the OPC, URCNA, LCMS, Reformed Baptists, and multitudes of independents. These churches don't have the budgets and celebs pushing them, but that's where the bulk of evangelical churchgoers are.

By the way, I hadn't read all the meltdown stuff in this thread before from earlier in the year, but it was interesting seeing how many of them referred to Ned Flanders. Nothing like appealing to a subversive show like the Simpsons to make a case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top