Where do you get the idea that we're "naturally repulsed" by the idea of incest?
Just ask any 16-year-old boy with a hot-looking mom!
People believed the ...( 1 month ago by scotpens)
People believed the sun moved around the earth for thousands of years. Were they right?
And absence of belief isn't the same as having a belief; it's the opposite. Calling atheism a religion is like saying black is white.
Do you want to work ...( 1 month ago by sakattackg397)
Do you want to work your fingers onto my skin?
FASTLOVERFUN (DOT) COM
No society could ...( 1 month ago by b0b0maj0)
No society could function on voluntary charity. And only the elitist of society could ever manage purely on themselves without ant government support. This system would resemble a feudal oligarchy. Today even the elitist could not support themselves without indirect government assistance, because their wealth and position sits on the foundations of people under them and their welfare, plus with no taxes at all whats stopping the poor from taking from the elite, since there no police funding.
I don't see why ...( 1 month ago by b0b0maj0)
I don't see why your so selective on why welfare should not be tax funded. You make the case that because people that have unfortunate circumstances be it disability, unable to find work, or their pension plans failed all of which are not the caused by laziness. If left to fend for themselves, that type policy will cost more in tax anyway because eventually you will have to put them in jail. By that logic, my house didn't burn down today so I shouldn't have to partially fund the fire department.
No society could ...( 1 month ago by scotpens)
No society could function on voluntary charity? Funny, that's what all societies did for thousands of years before the very recent invention of the modern welfare state. The private sector does just about everything better than government can. Just imagine how much more of your income would be available to donate to worthy causes of your choice if the government didn't take such a huge chunk out of your paycheck to maintain massive welfare bureaucracies.
I respect the fact ...( 1 month ago by redsoul15)
I respect the fact that you are attempting to defend individual freedoms, but you are being so over zealous about it that you are overlooking common sense. All three of these issues are pretty slippery slopes. Polygamy leads to dominance and emotional issues, especially for the women and children involved. Incest, heh...whether or not people are intending to procreate it will happen, and those children will have no "choice". As for cannabalism, how do you eat someone without harming them?
charming and Wild ...( 1 month ago by drookn583)
charming and Wild cam darling on cam
FASTSEXFINDER...DOT...COM
I guess if you had ...( 1 month ago by Freethought42)
I guess if you had permission to eat somebody's already deceased corpse... ;p
Yeah Im a Catholic ...( 4 weeks ago by kerouacbukowski)
Yeah Im a Catholic and Im a libertarian and your a disgrace..but the government shouldnt coerce you not to be one
Is it ok to eat ...( 3 weeks ago by Sepero1)
Is it ok to eat someone if their a socialist christian?
I really like the way they taste...
All three of these ...( 3 weeks ago by xSaintCardenasx)
All three of these ideas
are completely wronge. There
shouldn't even be any debate
on the situation. It's sick.
LOL! Virgins in ...( 3 weeks ago by curiouslittleboy)
LOL! Virgins in Heaven! XD
This guys an ...( 3 weeks ago by WeHavExplosiv)
This guys an idiot.He pretends to be intellectual until he forgets a word then he spins out of control.And he does NOT represent Libertarianism.He's just the comic shop guy from the Simpsons.
This guy is a ...( 3 weeks ago by j97hou6)
This guy is a HORRIBLE speaker.
He does NOTHING to advance his point of view.
LIke all the fanatics who think he is "wrong" for (trying to) defend incest, etc, he just YAPS. He doesn't MATH model cause and effect, force or consent and reactive counterforce. Does he mean eating humans who died by other means, or deliberately killing humans? Is anyting else available to eat? etc.
Unless all this is specified, one cannot say that human cannibalism is more wrong than humans eating animals.
Yeah - so this guy ...( 3 weeks ago by j97hou6)
Yeah - so this guy makes an incredibly CLUMSY attempt at defending incest, etc. All the whiners and babies who cry about someone with a DIFFERENT opinion than their own need to learn to worry about PRACTICAL things in life, PRACTICAL issues in this world. The same crybabies won't speak out against the sick, twisted practice in this planet of FORICING animals AGAINST THEIR WILL to be murdered for food by humans. This guy had better defend POLYGYNY, too. I assume he does.
Wow, I'm a ...( 2 weeks ago by rcroton)
Wow, I'm a Libertarian (in the Classical Liberal derivation, not the Anarcho-Syndacalist rubbish), and I have to say...I have to agree with him. And I went into watching this thinking "ok, I may believe what he believes, but this is going to be stupid".
What needs to be highlighted in understanding his argument, is that in all of these things he promotes several things- he promotes individual freedom, regulated chiefly by the HARM PRINCIPLE. That means freedom is granted so long as one...(cont:
Does not harm ...( 2 weeks ago by rcroton)
Does not harm another or inhibit their freedom. That is the cornerstone of Classical Liberal political thought, summed by John Stuart Mill as "Over his own mind and body, the individual is sovereign". Of course, this means he is not sovereign of anybody else's body. Thus the harm principle.
He also promotes freedom over equality. The difference between these is very subtle. The fact is, equality when forced isn't equality. Because that's like having two children, and forcing the intelligent one
to work at the same ...( 2 weeks ago by rcroton)
to work at the same skill level as the less gifted child. How is that equality, or freedom?
The same principle works on social welfare. If by my own power and capital I can help others, I will. It is my freedom to do so, that is charity and philanthropy. However, having my capital taken away from me to help others artificially without my consent is a violation of my freedom. And the very people who vote for social security would no doubt be charitable even without the policy.
The greatest ...( 2 weeks ago by rcroton)
The greatest argument against such social welfare measures as a violation of freedom and a promotion of the poverty it is trying to eradicate is on results.
Council housing and other such projects around the world only serve to lock families into one social state. It is not a springboard, as it goes hand-in-hand with other policies which prevent this from being so. However, if these policies did not exist, I could give someone a room to rent cheaply or for nothing, which would be a real spring-
-board!
I can ...( 2 weeks ago by rcroton)
-board!
I can think of no examples of such charitable, capitalist success which are matched by the opposite socialist, welfare state sort. For example in Britain alone! Port Sunlight and Bournville are both artifical towns, created by the industrialists who wanted to attract workers and give them a good lifestyle. The best example of widescale practices of social housing is the Projects in the USA, which are possibly the worst places to live in the country.
Bet people don't get it still!
Wow, you sure have ...( 2 weeks ago by StubbornCanary)
Wow, you sure have changed in a year.
you are fucking ...( 1 week ago by angelswept17)
you are fucking hilarious, haha diversty! lol im laughing really hard lol
FASTLOVERFUN (DOT) COM
FASTSEXFINDER...DOT...COM
are completely wronge. There
shouldn't even be any debate
on the situation. It's sick.
He does NOTHING to advance his point of view.
LIke all the fanatics who think he is "wrong" for (trying to) defend incest, etc, he just YAPS. He doesn't MATH model cause and effect, force or consent and reactive counterforce. Does he mean eating humans who died by other means, or deliberately killing humans? Is anyting else available to eat? etc.
Unless all this is specified, one cannot say that human cannibalism is more wrong than humans eating animals.