Culture

[Whiskeyjack]

I assume you mean "aren't mutually exclusive."

But they absolutely are mutually exclusive if you're from one of these dying "Trump Towns." There are places in this country where there literally isn't any work, but that doesn't mean there's no work to be had for those willing to move for it. None of what I'm talking about has anything to do with me. I'm a coastal elite globalist liberal, we've already established that. I'm talking about THOSE people. The Trump supporters.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

 

[wizards8507]

BlackpilledPete was responding to this specific tweet:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I've never understood this kind of sentimentality. Who mourns for Studebaker? Woolworth? <a href="https://t.co/taHAFHh2e3">https://t.co/taHAFHh2e3</a></p>— Kevin D. Williamson (@KevinNR) <a href="https://twitter.com/KevinNR/status/883530447795273728">July 8, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

KDW sees these companies going under and thinks, "Creative destruction! Progress! The Invisible Hand in action!" Trump supporters see families torn apart either by the need to relocate or by addiction and despair if they opt to stick together. And all while our elites pat themselves on the back for enabling the whole thing.

You act like these sorts of situations are an unalloyed good-- society benefits from increased efficiency, while the vice-ridden and the uneducated get their just desserts. Putting the very best possible spin on it, it's a tragic sacrifice justified by a much greater good. More likely it's just the logical outworking of an inhumane system that prioritizes abstractions like efficiency over human flourishing.

You act like "vice-ridden" and "uneducated" are conditions of birth from which there is no escape. They're not. It's a "locus of control" argument. While outside factors certainly play a part, I weigh an individual's decisions much more heavily in their outcomes than you do. You can choose to be a beneficiary of efficiency or you can choose to be a victim of it. I think you flirt dangerously close to determinism in a lot of your arguments.

 

[wizards8507]

Matthew 5:27 is about adultery.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

You act like "vice-ridden" and "uneducated" are conditions of birth from which there is no escape. They're not. It's a "locus of control" argument. While outside factors certainly play a part, I weigh an individual's decisions much more heavily in their outcomes than you do. You can choose to be a beneficiary of efficiency or you can choose to be a victim of it. I think you flirt dangerously close to determinism in a lot of your arguments.

I'll be the last one seeking to deprive the poor of moral agency. But as one to whom much has been given, the Church is very clear on what my duties toward the poor are. I am my brother's keeper. Think of how you treat Grace. She's a child who undoubtedly needs frequent correction regarding her appetites and habits. But you provide that to her out of love, and when she makes mistakes, you don't pull the rug out from under her by abandoning her to a life of poverty. But that's exactly how we, as society, treat our poorest and most vulnerable citizens.

Matthew 5:27 is about adultery.

It's a meme I faved on Twitter, dude. Pretty sure the original cartoon wasn't talking about liberalism.

 

[woolybug25]

On average, at least once every couple of weeks. But it's not a visit for a couple of hours, it's two or three nights overnight. Grace sees my mother in-law less frequently, but longer duration. A week long visit every couple of months with weekend visits sprinkled in. We also vacation with the extended family. Our next Disney trip will have my parents and one sister there along with us.

That's what I'm talking about. They are visitors or you are a guest. That is not the same of having regular, non occasion related contact with your family. It's always associated with "good times" or "celebration". Not helping you with yard work or consoling you during hard times. They are your facebook friends.

 

[wizards8507]

That's what I'm talking about. They are visitors or you are a guest. That is not the same of having regular, non occasion related contact with your family. It's always associated with "good times" or "celebration". Not helping you with yard work or consoling you during hard times. They are your facebook friends.

Clown comment bro. My mother in-law has had several hip surgeries in the last year and my wife is there for the duration of her recovery every time. I open and close her beach house every season. My mom babysits when we have ultrasound appointments. We meet for dinner all the time. I cut their grass and split their firewood.

But again, all of that is beside the point. I'd give up all of those things if I HAD TO in order to find work that kept food on the table.

 

[wizards8507]

I'll be the last one seeking to deprive the poor of moral agency. But as one to whom much has been given, the Church is very clear on what my duties toward the poor are. I am my brother's keeper. Think of how you treat Grace. She's a child who undoubtedly needs frequent correction regarding her appetites and habits. But you provide that to her out of love, and when she makes mistakes, you don't pull the rug out from under her by abandoning her to a life of poverty. But that's exactly how we, as society, treat our poorest and most vulnerable citizens.

It's a meme I faved on Twitter, dude. Pretty sure the original cartoon wasn't talking about liberalism.

Exactly. You have duties and I have duties. Each of us has duties. That's different than saying that the collective "All Of Us" has duties.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Exactly. You have duties and I have duties. Each of us has duties. That's different than saying that the collective "All Of Us" has duties.

The Common Good... what do it do? Educate thyself.

 

[woolybug25]

Clown comment bro. My mother in-law has had several hip surgeries in the last year and my wife is there for the duration of her recovery every time. I open and close her beach house every season. My mom babysits when we have ultrasound appointments. We meet for dinner all the time. I cut their grass and split their firewood.

But again, all of that is beside the point. I'd give up all of those things if I HAD TO in order to find work that kept food on the table.

You're clearly not getting whiskey or my points. Neither of us is accusing you of not being active with your family (I mean, how could we possibly know that?), but if you think being in contact every couple weeks is equal to continuous contact then you are mistaken. Being part of a community is different than visiting one.

 

[wizards8507]

You're clearly not getting whiskey or my points. Neither of us is accusing you of not being active with your family (I mean, how could we possibly know that?), but if you think being in contact every couple weeks is equal to continuous contact then you are mistaken. Being part of a community is different than visiting one.

I'm sorry, I just find that to be a bizarre sentiment. When I grew up, my furthest cousins (of 15) lived fifteen minutes away and I saw them... about every couple of weeks.

 

[NorthDakota]

I'm sorry, I just find that to be a bizarre sentiment. When I grew up, my furthest cousins (of 15) lived fifteen minutes away and I saw them... about every couple of weeks.

15 cousins? Do you people even Catholic bro?

 

[ACamp1900]

I have dozens of cousins... I have never met many and the ones I see most frequently I see maybe every few years...

 

[NorthDakota]

I have dozens of cousins... I have never met many and the ones I see most frequently I see maybe every few years...

My last count was around 40... including the liberal ones we've sent to wander the wilderness

 

[wizards8507]

The Common Good... what do it do? Educate thyself.

This is nonsense for two reasons.

1. It ignores natural rights.

2. Economic liberalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any charity or social program ever has. Even if we abandoned natural rights philosophy, we'd still want economic liberalism on utilitarian grounds.

So economic liberalism is superior in two ways, and they're self-reinforcing. Principles demand it even if it doesn't produce the best outcomes, yet it also produces the best outcomes regardless of principles.

15 cousins? Do you people even Catholic bro?

I have dozens of cousins... I have never met many and the ones I see most frequently I see maybe every few years...

My last count was around 40... including the liberal ones we've sent to wander the wilderness

15 first cousins one one side? Seems pretty legit to me.

 

[Irish#1]

I have dozens of cousins... I have never met many and the ones I see most frequently I see maybe every few years...

So what you're really saying is they don't like you?

 

[Whiskeyjack]

This is nonsense for two reasons.

Pater Edmund has forgotten more about Christianity than you know, so dismissing it as "nonsense" is not a good look. You may disagree, but the material you're arguing against is so thoroughly supported (with citations) by the magisterium that you'll likely find yourself outside the Church if you're successful.

1. It ignores natural rights.

It does not. Here's a brief introduction to the concept of right, and further notes on right and law.

2. Economic liberalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any charity or social program ever has. Even if we abandoned natural rights philosophy, we'd still want economic liberalism on utilitarian grounds.

Economic liberalism is distinct from technological progress, and there's not a lot of evidence indicating that one requires the other. Most of the improvement in our material standard of living is due to advances in agricultural science/ improving crop yields. But if you couldn't go on living without a massive variety of Oreos, and other sorts of vulgar consumerism... then you're right, we've got to stick with economic liberalism.

You've basically deified the Invisible Hand, attributing to it everything that is good in society. Any and all evil is the result of lazy humans or an incompetent meddling government, never inherent to capitalism itself. I think much of what you credit capitalism with properly belongs to Christendom-- Greek reason, Roman law and Christian theology. Since capitalism is itself the application of Protestant ideas to the market, it would all be inconceivable without Christendom anyway.

So economic liberalism is superior in two ways, and they're self-reinforcing. Principles demand it even if it doesn't produce the best outcomes, yet it also produces the best outcomes regardless of principles.

How are you measuring "best outcomes"? And are you aware of the alternatives (hint: it's not just communism and fascism.) Liberalism is really good at offering nearly unlimited choice when it comes to empty calories, meaningless distractions, and flimsy wares... but when it comes to the stuff that really matters, there's no real choice. "Don't like liberalism? You must be a Marxist Nazi! Interested in political change? Too bad, because your only options are two different flavors of the same shitty ideology, etc."

 

[Wild Bill]

Anal Sex: What You Need to Know | Teen Vogue

Just nuke us already.

 

[wizards8507]

Anal Sex: What You Need to Know | Teen Vogue

Just nuke us already.

"Anal sex, though often stigmatized, is a perfectly natural way to engage in sexual activity."

Nope! That's where the poop comes out!

What the actual fuck? Is this a thing now? "Prostate owner"!?

 

[GowerND11]

"Anal sex, though often stigmatized, is a perfectly natural way to engage in sexual activity."

Nope! That's where the poop comes out!

What the actual fuck? Is this a thing now? "Prostate owner"!?

To the first part... Ehh, maybe it isn't "natural," but humans have been participating since the ancient times

To "prostate owner" hahahahaha that's where it's going now.

I have no problem with a magazine discussing this stuff, but not Teen Vogue. I'm in favor of sex ed, but still there's a line.

 

[wizards8507]

To the first part... Ehh, maybe it isn't "natural," but humans have been participating since the ancient times

Fantastic. By that logic, I look forward to the Teen Vogue articles defending rape, incest, and murder, since people have been participating in those since ancient times, too.

 

[GowerND11]

Fantastic. By that logic, I look forward to the Teen Vogue articles defending rape, incest, and murder, since people have been participating in those since ancient times, too.

C'mon Wiz, don't pull that card. You're making a jump, and you know it.

 

[wizards8507]

C'mon Wiz, don't pull that card. You're making a jump, and you know it.

It's not a jump at all. "People have been doing it for thousands of years" is a shit reason to defend anything. "It's natural" is also a shit reason to defend anything. People have been doing 100% natural things that are really really bad for them since before the dawn of civilization. If you want to defend something, fine. But find a better argument than those two.

 

[GowerND11]

It's not a jump at all. "People have been doing it for thousands of years" is a shit reason to defend anything. "It's natural" is also a shit reason to defend anything. People have been doing 100% natural things that are really really bad for them since before the dawn of civilization. If you want to defend something, fine. But find a better argument than those two.

Anal sex between two consenting adults has been an enjoyable sexual stimulation for thousands of years. When done properly it does not inflict emotional or physical pain to either party, though some slight discomfort can arise for the receiving partner.

 

[wizards8507]

Anal sex between two consenting adults has been an enjoyable sexual stimulation for thousands of years. When done properly it does not inflict emotional or physical pain to either party, though some slight discomfort can arise for the receiving partner.

That's fine, my comment wasn't directed at you so much as the author of the article.

But it's still where the poop comes out.

 

[woolybug25]

Fantastic. By that logic, I look forward to the Teen Vogue articles defending rape, incest, and murder, since people have been participating in those since ancient times, too.

Did you really just compare PIIHB to rape, incest and murder?


That's worthy of a neg rep.



One that you will need to deal with, btw....

 

[wizards8507]

Did you really just compare PIIHB to rape, incest and murder?

No, obviously not. It points out that "...but people have been doing it for thousands of years" is a trash argument.

That's worthy of a neg rep.

One that you will need to deal with, btw....

What does that mean? Sounds vaguely like a threat.

 

[woolybug25]

What does that mean? Sounds vaguely like a threat.

*reported

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Negative reps and perceived threats after a debate on buttsex. We need football, and we need it NOW!!!!

 

[nlroma1o]