Bill Clinton is a vegan.
It therefore, necessarily follows that meat and all animal products are very dangerous for health.
‘The idea that men are stronger and more naturally more muscular than women is yet another example of the sexism inherent in modern biology. There are zero evolutionary reasons to believe that men should be expected to be more athletically adept than women. Paleolithic man was vegan and feminist. Paleolithic men and women both hunted antelopes together...I mean dug for roots and gathered vegetables and cultivated soy.
And of course they were also socialists. Prehumans were far more equal and egalitarian than modern man. No one had a larger cave than anyone else. We should aspire to return to such a level of equality and fairness. So what if the average life span was 20 years? A 20 year equal life is far superior to a 120 year life span of massive wealth-discrepancy in a world of corporate greed.’
-Pavlovsky, Chapman et al
Had an argument over a libtard who was overjoyed that a private company was sued for refusing to sell some product to gays. Because discrimination.
First of all
On discrimination in general:
A market economy wouldn’t work without discrimination. After all, choosing any one company over another is an act of discrimination. For example, it’s not discrimination against non organic farmers if I only buy from organic farmers ?
On discrimination in company hiring or service:
Businesses don’t discriminate in either service or hiring unless they are economically retarded(in which case they will soon cease to be an extant business, all on their own) or the high costs of discrimination are subsidized by the government thru policies like minimum wage, price floors or ceilings.
But discrimination is still a bad and dangerous thing!
So into the next point, it’s fine for a customer to discriminate and boycott gay or even non-organic products, but it’s not fine for a company to boycott, or refuse to sell to gays or hippies?
Maybe we could force everyone to purchase a monthly quota of progressive products
Even if you think it’s not okay for individuals to personally boycott gay companies, how could you ever enforce that? Force people to purchase a monthly quota of gay products? Actually, It’s perfectly easy to control who consumers buy from. With a big enough government It could conceivably be done. So why wouldn’t a libtard support doing that?
So again, as an individual you are allowed to boycott anti progressive companies, but individual say religious company owners aren’t allowed to boycott you?
An argument for fully free and legal economic discrimination
My argument is simple. If free individuals are freely allowed to participate in trade between eachother, then individuals should be allowed to refuse to buy from whomever they want, and individuals should be allowed to refuse to sell to whoever they want. The burden is on you to make a reasonable argument for why only buyers but not sellers ought to be free in their enterprise.
When I made this argument the libtard argued that there are in fact times when there are valid reasons for companies should be allowed to refuse service or boycott customers….Based on arbitrary opinions of what libtards think are valid reasons for refusing service. Like Im sure they would say it’s okay for companies to boycott homophobic customers for being homophobic, but it’s not okay to boycott gay or pro-gay customers for being homophilic(or homophalic?(hawhaw)).
And besides, ‘Valid reason‘ is completely subjective. For a person with a religious life view, their valid reasons may be different than yours. What gives you the right to force your life view and it’s implicit valid reasons on them, moreso than they have the right to force their life views and their implicit valid reasons, on you?
In other words, according to libtards, it should be a criminal offense to discriminate based on your religious beliefs. Unless said religious beliefs are those of the religion called progressivism. In which case, you are actively encouraged to discriminate.
Not protesting against china for animal cruelty because ‘we aren’t vegetarian’ is just as bad as not protesting against Muslims because ‘western culture isn’t perfect’.
In other words, saying a culture where zero animals have even small-scale animal rights cannot be criticized by one where several animals have some sort of honorary rights, because the latter does not have full animal rights, is like saying that a religion which still actively stones adulters cannot be judged by one which doesn’t allow gay people to marry…talk about a moral cop out.
Yuck. I can’t imagine something more of a turnoff than a submissive man aka a male feminist.
Ok we get it, you want to be lead around by a collar by a fat dyke in leather...Because patriarchy.
Or alternatively it’s like
‘I want to obey my husbands every command and fully submit to his will….Because Allah‘
People try to define themselves with various ideologies, religions etc
But one can’t define oneself. One can only describe oneself.
It is oft quoted: ‘No taxation without representation’
Yet few people seem to feel that the opposite ought also to be true. Why is it that we so blindly concede representation without taxation? Why should those on the government payroll, being payed entirely from stolen tax money, have representation in government? Why should those on welfare who pay no taxes have representation in government?
Representation without taxation is like this. Imagine this scenario:
There’s a shareholder meeting and some guy who has no shares whatsoever in the company randomly shows up, takes a seat and demands the right to vote on the next big business decision. What on god’a green earth is he doing there?
Someone the other day asked me: ‘how are things? Things moving forward?’
Moving forward? What other direction can things move?
Modern psychology is such BS, what with made up disorders like ‘Histrionic Personality Disorder’. Let me guess, it requires immediate medication? Do the overlord shrinks just sit around in some boardroom inventing these joke disorders in order to continue publishing subsequent DSMs? ‘Hmm let’s see…some dramatic hormonal slut who takes a lot of selfies…and we can call that ‘Histrionic Personality Disorder’…yes that’s brilliant, put that in the next DSM!’