>>16769473 Alright maybe I asked the wrong question then because basically I want to know why terrible, disgusting, heathenistic, corrupt, contemptuous, DISGUSTING """"""""""modern"""""""""" values are eroding the traditional values of marriage, a family life, men being men and women being women, which built the world we live in today.
So yeah... don't really have much sympathy to your views really unfortunately.
You posted a picture instead of a legitimate response because you know you couldn't argue against the fact that overpopulation is a meme and there is more than enough resources and energy at our tropic level to allow our prolonged existence
>>16769487 You keep doing you, anon. I pay my taxes, don't break the law, and don't hurt anyone. I disagree with your incredibly prudish and stuffy worldview but respect the work you and people like you do. The world needs people like you. I simply won't interact with your kind on any more than a cursory level and we'll all be ok.
>>16769501 I feel like the values that gave humanity the strength to build the modern world are falling victim to indulgence, hedonism, laziness, gluttony, greed, and ignorance. Have you ever read Brave New World? The world is basically becoming that. >>16769510 Because lol. No but seriously I wanna see what other people say. >>16769522 Encouraging men to be unmanly (sharing your "feelings", wearing skinny jeans, being overly concerned with appearance, having to be "nice", all that bollocks) >>16769526 I'm not religious, I just like that word. But I do think Christianity has good values. >>16769532 Maybe you're right and I should just be more of a man and fuck the world if they don't like it. >>16769533 Yup. You, yes you, are directly benefitting from the proceeds of war, from the fact that your ancestors raped, pillaged, stole, did everything they could to survive. You are benefitting from your nation's military, that killed other humans in battle to protect your nation and allow its people to live prosperously. Think about that the next time you want to spout your left wing bollocks you fucking mug. >>16769588 I'm surprised you haved caved that quickly, do you not have more desire to argue your case?
>>16769637 Men didn't do it back in the day. There's nothing wrong with being a Limey either. >>16769650 Faggot detected. >>16769651 Stop whinging about inequality when the world is unequal. If it means that much to you, give away all your possessions to other people. If you think the world is overpopulated, kill yourself. If you think the world needs food, spend all of your wealth on food for other people then kill yourself. Because those are the logical conclusions to what you're saying. >>16769656 What do you mean by this? >>16769657 Fair enough m9
>>16769679 I'm saying if you actually believe that stuff then stop whinging about it and go and do something about it, especially since you are obviously a relatively well off person living in a developed country, otherwise you wouldn't be on 4chan. You are part of those problems that you identify. Inequality is an inevitable part of life and you have benefitted from it.
Apparently your idea of "doing something about it" mostly consists of me killing myself, which would be pretty low-impact. The things I mentioned are happening on a systemic scale, beyond the reach of one more suicide and definitely beyond the reach of spending money or giving away possessions, both of which are laughable in the sense that they presuppose and support the very systems that create these issues.
Most importantly, though, you seem to believe that someone criticizing something needs to both have a better solution as well as work actively on achieving it, which is nonsense. Especially since all these things are broad knowledge, happening as of this moment, in front of all our eyes - how can I be the one to topple the world and the excellent blight we've installed on it? Maybe I rather choose the path of suicide, only slower: by giving in to narcotics and ignorance, because I cannot suffer the world we exist in and my powerlessness without freely delighting in both of those.
>>16769501 >You are free not to associate with them.
This is not really true, at least when it comes to business. As soon as you refuse to deal with someone in a manner that can be construed as being due to race, gender, sexual orientation or occasionally religion you're looking at civil and legal penalties.
>>16769597 >Violence is the supreme authority from which all others are derived A truth worth noting, however distasteful it may be. The only weight law has is the ability of its enforcers to hurt you.
Traditional, though I'm not fully in support of it.
To me, having the facade of a normal, functioning and healthy family and wife is better than living with the reality that shit's fucked up -- the value's are fucked up -- and that you simply have to deal with it.
I know that in no era of humanity has anyone truly stayed loyal -- it's not in our makeup. So with that said, I'd rather keep it under the rug, so to say, instead of flaunting it (which Modernity has really ushered).
Though, at the same time I'd rather have an equal partner. And equal say, equal partner, but we have specific roles to play in the family. And with those roles come certain expectations.
>>16769841 I'm pretty into systematic theology. I have some idea of what I'm talking about.
Essentially the entire debate resolves around the meaning of the Greek word arsenokoitai / arsenokoites. The idea that it's about gays is generally based on flawed linguistic theory, and doesn't really make all that much sense; it uses the same logic that would have "to understand" mean "to stand under" (it's a portmanteau of the word for man and the word for beds), and assumes that Paul invented a new word when there were already at least a dozen alternative words he could have used to refer to men who have sex with men.
I'm not picking and choosing what passages to believe; I am basing my views and actions off of systematic theology, like anyone who is geeky enough to say "oh boy, doctrine!" would.
>Lev 18:22 is part of the Israelite holy code, which only applies to Jews, and is sometimes considered to be referring to temple prostitution >Romans 1:26-27 could easily have been about pedastery or many other sexual issues within Roman culture at the time
Also, it's literally an afterthought in the Bible to begin with. It's mentioned four times at maximum. One can hardly consider it the very worst of sins, or whatever, not that you necessarily did that. At worst, I'm mistaken and I'm really as bad as... an alcoholic.
Except there's no actual downside to monogamous homosexuality.
I haven't dated any men, so stuff like loosening of the anal muscles or whatever isn't a problem for me; though I did come out as bi because I am really, really attracted to a gay black guy I know -- we have chemistry but don't want to date each other. I don't want to date him because he has commitment issues and he doesn't want to date me because I'm severely mentally ill. It works.
>>16769443 I prefer my own values started from the research of others, refined by comparing them to my personal observances, and put into action via the trial and error of my life.
Following others without question, as is implicit in the either/or, black/white perspective of your post is for the birds. I want to learn from the mistakes and successes of others. I want to see the world for what it is, what I want it to be, and what I can make it.
>Do you prefer traditional values or modern values? No.
>>16769786 >>>16769501 (You) >>You are free not to associate with them. >This is not really true, at least when it comes to business. As soon as you refuse to deal with someone in a manner that can be construed as being due to race, gender, sexual orientation or occasionally religion you're looking at civil and legal penalties.
I totally agree with that. You should have been able not to associate with anyone you don't like, even in business. If you don't like the state forcing you to be friends with others, try to abolish it or change it, don't try to change others to fit your image a good friend.
I am against you being forced to associate with me and a likely have very different values than those of the op, why would you force me to have the same values?
>>16769633 >>>16769501 (You) >I feel like the values that gave humanity the strength to build the modern world are falling victim to indulgence, hedonism, laziness, gluttony, greed, and ignorance. Have you ever read Brave New World? The world is basically becoming that.
Unless others force you to follow these values, you shouldn't care. Indulgence, hedonism, laziness, greed and gluttony is other people not choosing to work for the same purposes as you do. Ignorance means that they don't care to help you the way you want. None of these on their own bring you to a worse condition than not associating with them. The real issue is when you indeed can't avoid them because of laws, as mentioned in a post.
Also those values that helped humanity over the centuries included even conflicting values like slavery and a respect for freedom. The fact they they once helped humanity survive to the next century does mean that we owe these values respect.
Thread replies: 52 Thread images: 7
Thread DB ID: 486464
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.