The Truth

[Angrboda]

[vulcanlogician]

What have you seen before? Could you elaborate?

C'mon man. Support the idea that Russia has been worse than America in protecting free expression. I dare you. I'd be did be pleasantly surprised if you did. But you won't.

I bet you're an empty vessel, with nothing to say without a "forum" to rage at.

  Somebody basically telling me that they are going to ignore from now on by saying buh-bye.  Russia has been worse than America in protecting free expression???  Didn't you mean to suggest that I said that America was worse than Russia in protecting free expression?  What I did say once though is that in limiting freedom of speech, any evil becomes possible.  Being possible, as is the nature of mankind, it has been done.  

  You think being thrown in jail in Russia is as bad as things can get?  Think again.  Maybe if I'm allowed to be around long enough I can post some pictures for you of a few of the tens of thousands of White children who have been brutally murdered by blacks in this country.  I might also be able to effectively go into some of the travsty's of justice that have occurred in this country against Whites.  Maybe the greatest genocide in human history might interest you.  Or how about ritual human sacrifice.  I could also post some videos showing some real racism.  And it isn't Whites committing it.  Etc. etc. etc. etc.  Tell the admins to take the fucking chains off me.  I will show you what an "empty vessel" I am.

You think that "whites" should be taken together as a group and judged accordingly, according to one all-encompassing judgment. Same I suppose for "blacks?" Or gays? Yeah. I disagree with that. Not because of popular opinion. More due to avoidance of stupid ideas.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I’ve banned plenty of people. Not for what they say or the views they hold, but for breaking the rules.

Five times. You must be fucking stupid.

Boru

  I would bet the only "rule" they broke was in going against your censorship.  That's what your rules are.  Censorship.  Now I could see not allowing child porn or things like that.  But everything else should be allowed.  But unlike some around here may see this, that isn't a command.  Just a suggestion.

Golly, I’m glad you said it wasn’t a command. I’ll cancel the Administration Sabat that we had scheduled to do your bidding.

Boru

[arewethereyet]

  I would bet the only "rule" they broke was in going against your censorship.  That's what your rules are.  Censorship.  Now I could see not allowing child porn or things like that.  But everything else should be allowed.  But unlike some around here may see this, that isn't a command.  Just a suggestion.

Golly, I’m glad you said it wasn’t a command. I’ll cancel the Administration Sabat that we had scheduled to do your bidding.

Boru

Did I miss a memo?

[brewer]

  Tell me how I'm mistaken.  And if the ability to post is 30 posts AND 30 days, I guess I'm screwed.  Too bad I'm not into reading rules.

That there exists evolved traits that lead to racism and hatred does not mean that the suppression of such traits is oppressive, 'brainwashing' and bad, for several reasons.  The first of which is that while the goal of evolution may be facilitated by such things, it is possible that there are other evolutionary traits more important to our survival that entail the suppression of such traits.  As a social species, cooperation is as important as division, and if we are stronger by suppressing division so that we can create more effective cooperative societies, then it makes more evolutionary sense to suppress such things.  So you mistake that because something is evolved then preserving its expression is to our benefit.  This is a short-sighted view that fails to take into account that we are complex, composite creatures, with various traits waxing and waiting in their utility dependent upon whatever selective pressures exist in our environment.  You cannot simply take one trait of an organism and elevate that to an imperative.

The second mistake you make is that of an appeal to nature, which renders your argument invalid because it does not follow that because something is natural then it is therefore good.

And the third mistake you make is the genetic fallacy, in which you appeal to the way something has been while ignoring that the conditions attendant on that thing may have changed.  It may have been that at one time, when we existed primarily as nomadic bands based primarily on relations of kinship, competition was more important than cooperation.  It might make evolutionary sense for us to develop divisive traits and emphasize those if doing so leads to improved fitness for that environment.  But evolution moves slowly.  What was then, may not be now.  We also evolved brains so that we aren't required to react by rote to whatever composite of ability and circumstance presents itself.  We can wash our brains if doing so leads to a fitter organism given the current conditions and selective pressures.

And fourth, you make the same mistake as number one with respect to freedom of speech in ignoring that free speech is not the only good to be obtained.  Where free speech runs headlong into other, equally or more desirable goals, freedom of speech should be limited so as not to prevent the realization of multiple goods.  And in particular, I doubt forums curtailing your free speech has been the issue so much as you just being stupid and being discriminated against by these forums for the purpose of realizing other goods.   Providing a venue for shit for brains morons to scamper unbridled across the electronic savannah is hardly the most important aim of any forum.

Wow, you actually tried, I'm impressed. Lets see if it works.

---

---

---

That there exists evolved traits that lead to racism and hatred does not mean that the suppression of such traits is oppressive, 'brainwashing' and bad, for several reasons.  The first of which is that while the goal of evolution may be facilitated by such things, it is possible that there are other evolutionary traits more important to our survival that entail the suppression of such traits.  As a social species, cooperation is as important as division, and if we are stronger by suppressing division so that we can create more effective cooperative societies, then it makes more evolutionary sense to suppress such things.  So you mistake that because something is evolved then preserving its expression is to our benefit.  This is a short-sighted view that fails to take into account that we are complex, composite creatures, with various traits waxing and waiting in their utility dependent upon whatever selective pressures exist in our environment.  You cannot simply take one trait of an organism and elevate that to an imperative.

The second mistake you make is that of an appeal to nature, which renders your argument invalid because it does not follow that because something is natural then it is therefore good.

And the third mistake you make is the genetic fallacy, in which you appeal to the way something has been while ignoring that the conditions attendant on that thing may have changed.  It may have been that at one time, when we existed primarily as nomadic bands based primarily on relations of kinship, competition was more important than cooperation.  It might make evolutionary sense for us to develop divisive traits and emphasize those if doing so leads to improved fitness for that environment.  But evolution moves slowly.  What was then, may not be now.  We also evolved brains so that we aren't required to react by rote to whatever composite of ability and circumstance presents itself.  We can wash our brains if doing so leads to a fitter organism given the current conditions and selective pressures.

And fourth, you make the same mistake as number one with respect to freedom of speech in ignoring that free speech is not the only good to be obtained.  Where free speech runs headlong into other, equally or more desirable goals, freedom of speech should be limited so as not to prevent the realization of multiple goods.  And in particular, I doubt forums curtailing your free speech has been the issue so much as you just being stupid and being discriminated against by these forums for the purpose of realizing other goods.   Providing a venue for shit for brains morons to scamper unbridled across the electronic savannah is hardly the most important aim of any forum.

---

  What a load of crap.  Tell it to your cult leader.

Nope, didn't work.

@deepend Just go all ape shit and get it over with. From your first post you've wanted to get banned. It's not a real prophecy until it's fulfilled. Come on ape man, DANCE.

[Nay_Sayer]

I’ve banned plenty of people. Not for what they say or the views they hold, but for breaking the rules.

Five times. You must be fucking stupid.

Boru

  I would bet the only "rule" they broke was in going against your censorship.  That's what your rules are.  Censorship.  Now I could see not allowing child porn or things like that.  But everything else should be allowed.  But unlike some around here may see this, that isn't a command.  Just a suggestion.

You should try a career in comedy

[Angrboda]

  What a load of crap.  Tell it to your cult leader.

Nope, didn't work.

@deepend Just go all ape shit and get it over with. From your first post you've wanted to get banned. It's not a real prophecy until it's fulfilled. Come on ape man, DANCE.

[Fireball]

  I would bet the only "rule" they broke was in going against your censorship.  That's what your rules are.  Censorship.  Now I could see not allowing child porn or things like that.  But everything else should be allowed.  But unlike some around here may see this, that isn't a command.  Just a suggestion.

You should try a career in comedy

Why, do you want to see him explode on stage?

[Nay_Sayer]

You should try a career in comedy

Why, do you want to see him explode on stage?

Maybe

[brewer]

You should try a career in comedy

Why, do you want to see him explode on stage?

???