Dos the Left Hate Pride?

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Daywolf what do you think about this? I am curious because it speaks to the level of liberty one embraces. Something that I would see as analogous to this is legislated smoking bans in private establishments. If private establishments choose to allow their patrons to smoke that should be their business. The government should not be dictating what people can do in private establishments so long as nobody is harmed.

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Examples: You want to smoke pot? Go for it (I mean if it were legal now). You want to wear a dress? Sure thing! imo you should have a right to be wrong, as long as you don't try to force me to accept your choices e.g. girls bathrooms are for boys and girls etc. See I have issue with like that, and things like it. But, in the same thought, if Target (major US store) wants to do that, then I just don't go to Target any longer. However, if your city government says no the girls bathroom is for girls only, well Target can move to another city if they don't like it.

As long as state/local gov allows them to make that choice, which pref is by the vote of the people of that state or county etc. Pretty much been one of my points through the thread and called out as being a libertarian for it lol. The less regulation by the feds the better. You know fed law makers use to only work part time? Now it's serious business... with something like 300,000 regulations that can be enforced criminally as well as some 5000+ federal criminal laws. Just in the past ten years, the amount of federal laws have grown ~25%, counting the entire history of the US. This is a major shift in this country, needs to stop.


Hey Alarti0001, prove to me you are an actual person and not some robot. Oh, can't use words, right.. and you gotta do it three times in proper order while spinning around backwards reciting Shakespeare's Macbeth in reverse. Ok, now begin..

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ask the question here friend since you cant adequately link me to the question you asked (go back and read your post it doesn't address me).

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I've asked many question you just choose not to (or are uncapable of) answering them.
Facts bruh.

Just the most recent one where you fled. http://www.project1999.com/forums/sh...245819&page=15

Also red server has nothing to do with political discussion? Are you really this stupid (rhetorical question, of course you are)?

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So you say you answered her? Where? All you did was say why should they be able to. You didn't give any kind of reasoning or evidence. If you are going on the individual issue then corporations are entitled to the same rights as individuals (personhood) and should be allowed to discriminate. Also no rights or liberties are harmed in being refused a burger. You should do some research as to what your rights actually are.

It's like you are in a competition for the world's most stupid human. Corporations in now way should be entitled to the same rights as individuals. Unless you can somehow see corporations now having corporate rights for corporate children. This child is now the property of Carl's Junior (Idiocracy).

If some people are refused food at every location than you can in effect starve a targeted group of people.

You know those unalienable rights. Very inconvenient for a troglodyte racist like yourself.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

As long as state/local gov allows them to make that choice, which pref is by the vote of the people of that state or county etc. Pretty much been one of my points through the thread and called out as being a libertarian for it lol. The less regulation by the feds the better. You know fed law makers use to only work part time? Now it's serious business... with something like 300,000 regulations that can be enforced criminally as well as some 5000+ federal criminal laws. Just in the past ten years, the amount of federal laws have grown ~25%, counting the entire history of the US. This is a major shift in this country, needs to stop.


Hey Alarti0001, prove to me you are an actual person and not some robot. Oh, can't use words, right.. and you gotta do it three times in proper order while spinning around backwards reciting Shakespeare's Macbeth in reverse. Ok, now begin..

Why do you keep avoiding meaningful discussion? I'm asking for a basic standard of proof. Its elementary logic kiddo. Grow up.

[Nihilist_santa]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why shouldn't it be? It already does with male-feme bathrooms. It is a private establishment and it does not infringe upon anyone's liberty, because individuals are not required to visit the establishment.



The delusion comes from confusion of sex, whether gender can be separated from it or not. Man/woman are clearly defined terms based on sex. If you believe that you are a man when you do not posses a Y chromosome and do produce eggs, then you are delusional. If you believe that you are a woman when you have a y chromosome and produce sperm cells, then you are delusional. Separating and then confusing the terms gender and sex does not make it any more rational. You can be a masculine woman or a feminine man and choose to live as you perceive one or the other, but to believe you actually are is delusion.

There is an often cited study in which twins were used. One twin had a botched circumcision from a laser procedure that destroyed his genitals. Doctors told the family that without his penis the boy would have problems coping so they tried to force the child to be a female. They never told him he was born male and the doctor tried all kinds of weird shit like making the twins simulate sex positions in some attempt to retune the boy into adopting female sexuality. Long story short the boy refused to accept being a female and chose to later live his life as the male he was born as before committing suicide. Interpret that however you wish. Ive seen a multitude of interpretations both pro and anti trans. I fall in the anti crowd obviously.

[Nihilist_santa]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's like you are in a competition for the world's most stupid human. Corporations in now way should be entitled to the same rights as individuals. Unless you can somehow see corporations now having corporate rights for corporate children. This child is now the property of Carl's Junior (Idiocracy).

If some people are refused food at every location than you can in effect starve a targeted group of people.

You know those unalienable rights. Very inconvenient for a troglodyte racist like yourself.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Seriously dude you are employing childish logic. No one is FORCED to buy food from Burger King and so they have other options meaning they wont starve. As far as corporations they already have personhood so dont argue with me about it. Its a done deal. 14th amendment bro.

That preamble was written by whites land owners for white land owners. They didn't envision the multicultural monstrosity we would become.

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why do you keep avoiding meaningful discussion? I'm asking for a basic standard of proof. Its elementary logic kiddo. Grow up.

I found where Alarti0001 lives online http://www.cleverbot.com/
Now it all makes sense!

Breitbart answered it spot on, it's your own problem you cant make sense of it.

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why shouldn't it be? It already does with male-feme bathrooms. It is a private establishment and it does not infringe upon anyone's liberty, because individuals are not required to visit the establishment.

"It already does" Is never a good argument. You seem to be arguing based on basic liberty that you wan't the government to have more control of food, services etc so that corporations can deny liberty? It might be a private establishment but it exists within the US government. A person is no less of a person on the street than in a building.

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The delusion comes from confusion of sex, whether gender can be separated from it or not. Man/woman are clearly defined terms based on sex. If you believe that you are a man when you do not posses a Y chromosome and do produce eggs, then you are delusional. If you believe that you are a woman when you have a y chromosome and produce sperm cells, then you are delusional. Separating and then confusing the terms gender and sex does not make it any more rational. You can be a masculine woman or a feminine man and choose to live as you perceive one or the other, but to believe you actually are is delusion.

Sorry that doesn't hold on to the basic variation of human life. It would probably be somewhat true in most of the animal kingdom where the only purpose of that life is survival and procreation.
Considering basic natural mutation, and chromosomal anomalies. A women, by your definition, XX and a man XY. What is an XXX is this person more of a woman than you? Less of a woman? Some new gender? All the chromosome does is tell the bodies what organs to develop and what hormones to pump out.

When a man ages and they start producing less testosterone is he becoming less of a man? If a woman has a hysterectomy does she lose her gender?

Does a male lion think of itself as a man? The animal kingdom doesn't have conscious self awareness . Gender is a concept humanity created to help identify ourselves.

A person's SEX is about biological equipment.

Don't confuse Gender and Sex.

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I found where Alarti0001 lives online http://www.cleverbot.com/
Now it all makes sense!

Breitbart answered it spot on, it's your own problem you cant make sense of it.

No Daywolf... you seem to not be able to make sense of it. If you can it would be simple for you to explain it.. yet you don't.

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Seriously dude you are employing childish logic. No one is FORCED to buy food from Burger King and so they have other options meaning they wont starve. As far as corporations they already have personhood so dont argue with me about it. Its a done deal. 14th amendment bro.

That preamble was written by whites land owners for white land owners. They didn't envision the multicultural monstrosity we would become.

Yet if every food place adopted burger kings supposed ideas.. then they wouldnt have food. Speaking of childish logic LOL!.

Ummm maybe you should read the 14th amendment. It's not about corporations.

White didn't even exist. People identified from their euro origins. White is a concept designed to control the working poor and present a common enemy (the slaves). Either way.. the US at those times was already multicultural. Catholic, protestants, Irish, English, German, French etc. These were cultures that fought wars among each other for centuries. The Irish were the original low class "ghetto people".

[Nihilist_santa]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

"It already does" Is never a good argument. You seem to be arguing based on basic liberty that you wan't the government to have more control of food, services etc so that corporations can deny liberty? It might be a private establishment but it exists within the US government. A person is no less of a person on the street than in a building.



Sorry that doesn't hold on to the basic variation of human life. It would probably be somewhat true in most of the animal kingdom where the only purpose of that life is survival and procreation.
Considering basic natural mutation, and chromosomal anomalies. A women, by your definition, XX and a man XY. What is an XXX is this person more of a woman than you? Less of a woman? Some new gender? All the chromosome does is tell the bodies what organs to develop and what hormones to pump out.

When a man ages and they start producing less testosterone is he becoming less of a man? If a woman has a hysterectomy does she lose her gender?

Does a male lion think of itself as a man? The animal kingdom doesn't have conscious self awareness . Gender is a concept humanity created to help identify ourselves.

A person's SEX is about biological equipment.

Don't confuse Gender and Sex.

So Maerlith is crazy then? Gender is a social construct right? So how can there be a medical reason for "gender dysphoria" ?

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by Nihilist_santa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There is an often cited study in which twins were used. One twin had a botched circumcision from a laser procedure that destroyed his genitals. Doctors told the family that without his penis the boy would have problems coping so they tried to force the child to be a female. They never told him he was born male and the doctor tried all kinds of weird shit like making the twins simulate sex positions in some attempt to retune the boy into adopting female sexuality. Long story short the boy refused to accept being a female and chose to later live his life as the male he was born as before committing suicide. Interpret that however you wish. Ive seen a multitude of interpretations both pro and anti trans. I fall in the anti crowd obviously.

I am not sure what to think about that other than it is sad. I don't see how it plays into the gender-sex word play arguments or helps to validate delusion over rational choices based on inclinations, which is the point I was making or trying to make. I suppose it does tie-in to the overall discussion of pride though. One of the biggest reasons for transgender elevated suicide/depression rates stems from false beliefs perpetuated by counselors, politicians and media that you can be something you are not. It results in perpetual dissatisfaction because no matter how much you tell yourself its true and no matter how close you appear to be, there will be differences and every other rational person will remind you of them (whether intentional or not). Avoidance is not a path to happiness.