What you're going to court for?
Yes, population reduction is a more gradual process but that's one of the end goals.
It's not that gold is high, it's just fiat being devalued.
It's in plain sight - they're mocking us. Wake up, sheeple!
Makes total sense... in your head that is.
They always go either to sufism or eastern mysticism. It's reactionary. Anything except Christ of course. White man religion bad.
He's not muslim. He's a perennialist - a syncretic belief system that claims all religions have parts of the truth and that there is a common thread among them all throughout the ages. Perennialism grants itself a privileged epistemic position from which it can judge the truthfulness of all other religious and philosophical systems. This of course is completely arbitrary because they too operate from a paradigm which is rather naive and arrogant (I call it the "we now know" paradigm).
Aldous Huxley was a major proponent as well as other NWO propagandists like C. Jung and Joseph Campbell and the whole new age and hippy movement. It's the basis for a one world religion. I'd add the last few popes to the list. Globalists like Charles love it because it gives them an air of false spirituality and sophistication, while furthering their agenda ("see, I appreciate all world cultures and religions, I'm not a bigot").
I've been using the most basic unscented unwhitened TP for a long time now. Regular TP is fake and gay and will likely give you cancer at some point. Same goes for all hygiene products and detergents. Those artificial scents are toxic.
The guy who made the video is clueless.
You've just proven my point by disagreeing. It was exactly my intention and that's why I brought a divisive subject like abortion to illustrate that how you see it (moral or immoral) depends on your worldview. I'm not even going to argue about whether a fetus is a human being and what the criteria is. Like who decided viability is the way to go? Viability is a stupid and arbitrary criteria because when born, babies still can't live on their own without adults taking care of them - how is this viable? Also, you can't freeze a fetus but an embryo. Most abortions are at the fetus stage.*
It is the same with abortion, some (not me as you might suspect) may see it as serving a good, but you do not, who is right?
**There are two logical options: **
-
there is universal objective morality, which has to have a standard and be justified within the worldview; if the worldview is materialism, then morality should be found somewhere within the material world (like the physical standard for kilogram residing in a Paris museum or maybe inside the brain which some atheists go for)
-
morals are relative to the subject/society in which case nothing is inherently good or bad and everything, including the worst crime possible you could imagine, is a matter of preference. Like in the case of Jeffrey Dahmer eating brain custard - a moral relativist is forced to say "it's not my thing and I don't prefer it, but you do you buddy" if he were consistent in his position (which they never are).
The crux of our argument is that my worldview can account for objective morality while yours can't. Unless you come up with a way to justify objective morality, you're stuck with moral relativism, in which case you can't call anything inherently good or bad.
*Looks like I did argue that too after all.
People who know nothing of religion KNOW inherently when something is considered a GOOD act. The opposite, I believe , is also true.
That's demonstrably false. I can go to history or different cultures and point out human sacrifice was deemed moral. But I don't even have to do that because there is human sacrifice in our society as we speak in the form of abortion. If people inherently knew what was good and evil there would be zero debate on any moral issue including abortion. Same goes for slavery, death penalty, freedom of speech, homosexuality, adultery, indecency, etc. None of this is inherently good or evil outside of a specific moral framework.
The problem of justifying morality outside of religious dogma has been a major one for Enlightenment philosophers and was relevant until the 20th century when they dropped it because they saw it's a fools errand. One of the major empiricists, David Hume (an atheist) posed a very important problem - that you can't get an "ought" from an "is". You can't infer a moral truth through knowledge about the world as it is. What this means is you can't expect people to know what's good, desirable, valuable via observation of the world around them.
If you're somewhat familiar with philosophy you should know there aren't self-evident basic truths outside of a worldview/paradigm that interprets the world. This is true for metaphysical and epistemological problems, but it's most evident and most accessible to lay-philosophers in the ethical field. This is why I asked what's your account for morality under your worldview since you obviously reject the Christian account. What's the framework that let's you determine what is good and what is bad and is that just your subjective preference or is it an universally valid objective principle?
Good exists outside of religion, Evil exists outside of religion, there should be no supernatural basis explanation needed for things that are inherent.
Great but calling something weird is not an argument. You should be able to provide justification for morals in your worldview then (whatever it is) instead of reasserting your position that we don't need Christianity or religion. What is good and evil? Does it exist universally? What is morality grounded in (as in where it is located and what is the objective standard)? How do we have knowledge of it?
Cool. So what's your basis for morality? What's the correct take regarding what's good and what's evil?
No forgiveness unless one repents. Scripture is clear on that. Liberal Christians want to have the cake and eat it too by living a sinful life without repenting and expecting a reward in the afterlife. Their reward is in this world as Jesus said.
Hell is eternal. There's no hope of salvation once you're dead.
And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” Matthew 25:46
It's a binary weapon. Both diet, environment and culture play a crucial role in molding the individual and society.
Tap water may not be enough on it's own but we're poisoned from everything surrounding us and it adds up.
America is a state made of corporations. America first means American corporations first. It's fascism.
There was a compilation with over 40 similar videos
Interesting. Do you have an example?
You're determined to miss the point I made. Trump is obviously pro-Israel. But so was any administration before him (maybe Kennedy and Nixon had qualms but they were disposed with). The US is under AIPAC rule and its zionification dates back to the 1800s. How does Trump continuing this bad policy negate his good decisions regarding other pressing issues? Hardly anyone beside schizo Q-tards expect a messiah who will roll back a 100+ years of policy making. We can't even be sure what exactly is within his power given that the US is de facto technocracy/cryptocracy and not a presidential republic.
It's a bit like looking at a winning stock over a long period of time - they may have lost a few battles (if any) but in the long run, they've been unimaginably successful. Society is more depraved and enslaved with every passing decade. The usury debt system reigns supreme (only hope is in BTC). Their mind control techniques and psy ops are wreaking havoc. The depop transhumanist program has managed to reverse population growth for the first time in history. They are winning the war.
Again with the black and white vision. Sure, Trump has policies that are problematic. He also does stuff that is good (like his position on Ukraine and his BTC stockpile). There's a reason why libtards and legacy media and politicians are pissing their pants because of him. The fact there are good things we can talk about already puts him ahead of Biden and the rest.
Stupid distinction and false dialectic. The Democrats are technocrat fascists par excellence. This is the core of their ideology of their NWO (neocons included too). What matters is actions and if Trump and Elon do something right I don't care what you call them. I think Elon is a transhumanist too. In politics things ain't never black or white. This guy engages in narrative creation in social media, while complaining about narratives being fed to people on social media. He makes some good points but it all seems a bit too cherry picked and conveniently packaged to fit his theory.
Also, appeals to muh freedom is a common American rhetoric. This is called ethos. Every politician does it because this is what the US citizens believe their country is about.
They never show themselves. Remember they've been operating from the shadows and from an underdog position for centuries. They only got the upper hand the last 150-200 years and they're not loosing that easily. They still control the financial system, mass media and culture.
The supposed return to tradition is not changing society to what it was under the patriarchal system - feminism, marxism, consoomerism, materialism, satanism and all around degeneracy have left their mark on the soul of people. What we'll see more likely is a return to a liberal left-leaning society which would appear as conservative due to Overton window shift.
How does a non-medical professional know if a corpse's blood is completely drained?
Is this a joke?