BudBro

Ok. I won't put words in your mouth, but will suggest that common sense and cultural norms can be seen in two radically opposed political parties. You expressed opposition for the trans in your wife's locker room, yet you seem to support the political party which encourages the degeneration of moral norms that end up with d*&ks out in the locker room. That, seemingly, is a conflict...or hypocrisy (or, just play acting on the bored so you can f**k with people). Either way, the argument seems to dissipate into which political party best keeps the slope the most dry.

A significant impact on women's rights in the muslim world has come from Christianity.

I heard you. You followed up with: "And how slippery can the slope be when there are so very few trannies?" I posed it as a way to move beyond the single issue. How do you propose we move it back toward what was originally intended by the framers? And, who, do you propose, is going to make that happen (if, indeed, that is something you even espouse)?

Think bigger than the one issue. Back to the op, then, who is to decide what is good and what is evil (moral relativism)? You seem fine with wives and daughters having a grown man play with his d*&k in the women's gym locker room or school locker room. At what point is there a line to be drawn, and who should draw it, in your opinion? Does it need to be your daughter in order to affect your "live and let live" philosophy of life? Does it need to progress to being raped or killed to get to the line in the sand? If it's someone else's concern only, should it be left alone? To the extreme, would you just sit back and allow another Jewish holocaust because it's in another country and a different culture?

It's the "slippery slope" that is the threat, and which makes each move of the boundary line existential. Carving out more and more rights for tiny minority populations is divergent from the framing of the country.

Trans is sexual fetish. Though I don't know yours, nor you know mine, it's important that neither us have the "right" to impose it on a societal scale.

In the pantheist worldview (many gods), the presence of evil can be explained, but at the cost of making evil an eternal principle that’s just as strong as good. There can be no final victory of good over evil; they simply coexist in constant conflict & balance each other out. But if evil is just as necessary as good, then is evil really evil or is it just different? There’s no moral standard or judge who is superior to the conflict & who can decide whether something is truly good or evil. In the Star Wars saga, the thought comes up at various points (especially in Episode III: Revenge of the Sith) that good & evil are only points of view; what’s “good” according to the Jedi is “bad” according to the Sith & vice-versa. There’s no final authority outside of one’s own opinion for deciding what’s good & evil. This is relativism. It is the belief that truth and right and wrong can only be judged in relation to other things and that nothing can be true or right in all situations. Marxism, then, from the atheism (deism) worldview, is in conflict with the pantheist worldview of moral relativism. Marx would have argued there is a way, and must be a way, to judge right and wrong in order for the society to move forward. As such, there must be a judge. That judge, for Marx, was government to run the economy.

The extreme form of deism (a god that just shrugs his shoulders at the world and allows it to run on natural laws and doesn't get involved in its affairs) is secular atheism, where God is pushed so far from our thinking that we don't believe He exists at all. The advantage is we aren't accountable to a higher being and free from God's authority. But, it leaves us as nothing more than a cosmic accident in a world that cares nothing about us and won't miss us. In the USA, atheism isn't popular. But, as mentioned by the op, atheism has been extremely influential in geopolitics over the past century. Marx taught that all of reality is the evolution of matter. All human history is shaped by the evolution of economic systems. In the modern period, this evolution has resulted in various problems. People try to solve these problems through religion, which (Marx says) tells people to endure the economic problems of the present in exchange for the hope of a perfect world in the afterlife. Marx says this is a false solution, not only because God doesn’t really exist, but also because religion acts like a sedative drug, tranquilizing people so that they don’t try to make the present world better. Marx said the true solution is for the poor and oppressed to take up arms and revolt against their oppressors in order to bring in the next stage of evolution, which is a perfect Communist society in which all private property is abolished and everyone works for the good of others. Marx’s ideas were put into practice throughout the 20th century, resulting in a massive loss of life (because any action that promoted Communism was considered justified, no matter how violent). Source of “cost”: The Black Book of Communism. 25 mil died in USSR; 65 mil in China; 1.7 mil in Cambodia; etc. Revolutions inspired by Marx led to the establishment of Communist governments across the globe in the 20th century. By the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, however, many of these governments, especially in Eastern Europe, collapsed. Marx’s philosophy proved to be unlivable in practice. In modified form, however, Marx’s philosophy lives on in East Asia, most notably in China and North Korea.

No, you didn't note dosage. You should publicly apologize for lying. It says the proprietary ingredient in the duramet product is classified as a carcinogen. That isn't about ivermectin. Geezus dude. WHO says vegetables contain over 100 carcinogens. Cut the stupid s**t. You're part of the disinformation.

Need a link for this that doesn't speak of dosage. Yes, the vet dosage is for a 1250 pound horse. That makes for 6 doses for a 200 pound human (for $12...that's $2 a dose). The ivermectin ingredient is the same in both. If it was a different ingredient, it would be labelled as such.

She colluded with deeohjay. Shocker. As did Smith and the old dude who posted his dik pick on the internet. Get your s&+t together.

It's a small hill upon which you've committed to die.

Plenty of info out there for those wanting to learn. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7536980/ Why did you allude to a "human" ivermectin? Are there patents for different versions? (that's rhetoric, of course. ivermectin is ivermectin.)

Yeah, that's why. "with 445 confirmed cases of VITT, 81 of these fatal in the UK alone." It's time you don the hat of tin foil and use your superpowers to help rid the planet of these bioweapons.

Killer (previous offender of reckless neglect) receives commendation.

Right? TDS keeps people like the dozer from making cogent replies. Plus, he is you. There can't be more than one of you on this bored with all these stupid democrat replies.

This is called a "poisoning the well" fallacy.

Well, except for the part where it was the capital officer that murdered her.

This has to be one person with 30 personalities on the bored. There aren't this many tards walking amongst us.

You're a lost soul. Best you vote for Joe again.

Dems already have their summer riot plan moving along with the protests by the jew haters. Oddly, both the terrorist sympathizers and Jewish people vote Democrat.

Beam works for calming TDS.

Remember when the Lincoln Project founder was outed for soliciting gay sex from the men working at the Project?

troof

Ride the train for a Nathan's Famous Ride the train for cherry juice in Brighton. Buy a fake Rolex off a street seller so you can say you did. See if you can get one under $100. Canal street for a fake D&G purse. Wall Street is nice on a weekend. Nobody else there. You should see the garment district, but probably pretty quiet on a weekend. Times Square at 2am is still busy.