â„–2473111[Quote]
I think that just about everybody, no matter what side of the political spectrum, owes one massive apology to the hard-line social conservatives of the early American film industry. They were the last line of defense between art, thereby society at large, and complete degradation. Had they succeeded in censoring American film, we would have no (((Epstein))) scandals. We would have no systematic abuse of children and young women in the American entertainment system. We would have no mass psyops on the American public via the media (psyops would still certainly exist, but to a lesser extent).
<
Now, of course, the folks who started this movement were right wingers. However, if you asked a right winger today, they would be very hesitant to tell you they are pro-censorship. They sure do love their so-called "freedom of speech", of course meaning their right to pornography, graphic violence and other such things being broadcasted to all Americans. Likewise, leftists and social justice folks simply cannot see the forest for the trees here. They would be the first to tell you that the conservatives trying to censor Television were a bunch of right-wing nutjobs, yet they also obviously cry about the extent to which female actors are abused. Why can't they see that the former was trying to prevent the latter? Only God knows.
<
What I'm trying to say is that Modernity and her seemingly endless affinity for sexual evil and other such things that corrupt the good and innocent is not politically exclusive.
<
You have your establishment neo-conservatives who are all caught up in this recent Epstein business. Despite the Christian aesthetics, you have seen how deep the sexual deviance runs in these circles. On the right you also have your libertine-libertarian types. The jokes about all lolberts being lolicons have been long saturated on this board by now, so I'll let you infer my thoughts on them. Moving to the left wing now, you have your more center-left feminists. They are obviously not pro-pedophilia, have enabled such things in society via assisting the Free Love movements of the 60s and 70s. Then, of course, you get to your John Money, Harvey Milk types. These scum of society are openly pro-pedophile and pro-paraphilia.
<
I point all of these out to say that in order for your politics to actually make any positive change to society, they need to be radically sexually conservative. Your goals as an upright man in politics and life ought to be to protect the innocent in all you do. The quintessence of modern politics (I say modern in just about as negative way as possible here) is the destruction of good, and more importantly, the innocent. This is done via sexual degeneracy, so an upright man ought to be sexually conservative.
â„–2473132[Quote]
this
â„–2473138[Quote]
Gnome deniers lose.
â„–2473143[Quote]
You would benefit from learning how to write what you want to convey in less words geg.
The zealousness its more than honorable though.
â„–2473185[Quote]
>>2473111 (OP)I hate to say it but religion may be a necessary evil in society. Christianity provides people a set of virtues to live by within a spiritual framework. I wonder if people's supposed experiences communicating with God is actually just the kind, virtuous part of themselves that they have abstracted and compartmentalized away. Postmodernism and cynicism is so pervasive in our culture that the idea of being forgiving and kind to yourself and others can only be explained by an other that exists in you (ie God). I think that actually speaks to the good of people, and the evil of postmodernism, that the Christians I've met are upstanding individuals. Maybe that is God, but it could be you. People cannot stand thinking of themselves as good like that.
â„–2473189[Quote]
>>2473185If you ever heard a voice speaking in your head, you would know it was not your own.
â„–2473190[Quote]
>>2473157Geg. Keep at it! There is a difference between trying to sound smart and initially using complicated words because the topic is equally as complex and difficult.
Someone like you who can pull all these things apart and lay them out in fullness, is akin to a expert in what you explain. But the master can explain a topic in all kinds of levels of detail.
Spreading the gospel and the truth requires a man to be able to speak plainly and deeply. And I know you can!
â„–2473210[Quote]
>>2473189I can't conceive of a voice in my head that I can't control.
â„–2473212[Quote]
>>2473190Thanks big guy. I've always liked all kinds of writing, so I will definitely keep at it. Maybe I'll try and formally learn how to dictate my thoughts better.
>>2473210What if I came up to you and said "Do not think of the color red." What would happen?
â„–2473227[Quote]
>>2473210And I do mean voices, not thoughts and ideas that you then translate into words if you ever write them down or speak of them to others.
â„–2473250[Quote]
>>24732125% of people report "hearing voices" at some point in time in their lives. This is a tool the devil uses, one of the last lines of offense. They spam wrong teaching into a person 24/7 at the worst case. The lack of sleep as well as the constant running in circles is what causes people to fall into mental illnesses. This mental projection of voiced thoughts can be equated to a psychic attack… but it's more like a non-stop prank call that doesn't end and wants you to engage with them.
â„–2473256[Quote]
>>2473250While there are witches and psychics that have fallen for these tricks. I know for a fact, that the voices are just the voices of demons that are around all of us, and that they speak with the intent to deceive.
For if I heard a devil talk and the devil said "2+2=4 trust me i am honest", I would call him a nigger and a kike and not hear him.
â„–2473261[Quote]
>>2473250I thought we were talking about internal monologue
â„–2473383[Quote]
Okay goodnight everybody, God bless
â„–2473403[Quote]
>>2473111 (OP)>Had they succeeded in censoring American film, we would have no (((Epstein))) scandals. We would have no systematic abuse of children and young women in the American entertainment systemHow are the two correlated? Women have been put in skimpy outfits in films long before that
â„–2473445[Quote]
>>2473111 (OP)another MIOrth truthnuke
â„–2473457[Quote]
>>2473185i like this perspective. speaking as a Christian myself i have my biases, but i support things like having the ten commandments listed on a wall since they instruct and give good morals to the future generation.
<i dont even care if its "religious" or whatever since they are pretty basic morals that i dont think anyone could object to.
<overall though, you as a parent need to rear your child to be a righteous person. you need to raise them to be good and successful. too many parents leave their children on the curb and wonder why they end up being useless or unmotivated.
â„–2473493[Quote]
>I think that just about everybody, no matter what side of the political spectrum, owes one massive apology to the hard-line social conservatives of the early American film industry. They were the last line of defense between art, thereby society at large, and complete degradation. Had they succeeded in censoring American film, we would have no (((Epstein))) scandals. We would have no systematic abuse of children and young women in the American entertainment system. We would have no mass psyops on the American public via the media (psyops would still certainly exist, but to a lesser extent).
><
>Now, of course, the folks who started this movement were right wingers. However, if you asked a right winger today, they would be very hesitant to tell you they are pro-censorship. They sure do love their so-called "freedom of speech", of course meaning their right to pornography, graphic violence and other such things being broadcasted to all Americans. Likewise, leftists and social justice folks simply cannot see the forest for the trees here. They would be the first to tell you that the conservatives trying to censor Television were a bunch of right-wing nutjobs, yet they also obviously cry about the extent to which female actors are abused. Why can't they see that the former was trying to prevent the latter? Only God knows.
><
>What I'm trying to say is that Modernity and her seemingly endless affinity for sexual evil and other such things that corrupt the good and innocent is not politically exclusive.
><
>You have your establishment neo-conservatives who are all caught up in this recent Epstein business. Despite the Christian aesthetics, you have seen how deep the sexual deviance runs in these circles. On the right you also have your libertine-libertarian types. The jokes about all lolberts being lolicons have been long saturated on this board by now, so I'll let you infer my thoughts on them. Moving to the left wing now, you have your more center-left feminists. They are obviously not pro-pedophilia, have enabled such things in society via assisting the Free Love movements of the 60s and 70s. Then, of course, you get to your John Money, Harvey Milk types. These scum of society are openly pro-pedophile and pro-paraphilia.
><
>I point all of these out to say that in order for your politics to actually make any positive change to society, they need to be radically sexually conservative. Your goals as an upright man in politics and life ought to be to protect the innocent in all you do. The quintessence of modern politics (I say modern in just about as negative way as possible here) is the destruction of good, and more importantly, the innocent. This is done via sexual degeneracy, so an upright man ought to be sexually conservative.
â„–2474669[Quote]
Good morning everyone
â„–2474673[Quote]
>>2474669Good morning
nice thread
â„–2474815[Quote]
>>2473111 (OP)you dont get it do you
maybe im being a total muslim about this but all ontological existence is war between soul and underlying biologies
you pass the turing test but that just means you will die and then get raped
â„–2474822[Quote]
>>2473111 (OP)>Had they succeeded in censoring American filmQueue the 4tranny screeching. The Retarded perverts are so averse to modesty that they would actually advocate for the removal of stalls in public bathrooms.
â„–2474824[Quote]
Monk and a baby
â„–2474851[Quote]
>>2474822VGH what could have been, I wonder if proper censoring no loosening of hayes code and other cersorshipping things in whatever ways would have effected foreign media too?
Bollywood, China, etc. le Fr*nch and Crapanese have always been massive gooners so I don't think anything would completely prevent them from being diddybluds but I wonder if a continuously innocent or conservative America would have kept the rest of the world more "innocent" too?
I know a lot of Americans get annoyed when their influence is brought up in that way, "It ain't US the EU invented wokeness! French were always perverts, Germany had gay and tranny books" etc. But still it's hard not to see the rest of the world is copying America monkey see, monkey do whether self inflicted or thru American efforts either way….
â„–2474854[Quote]
Establishing a "Great Fecalwall" in India could serve as a protective measure for Americans against the rising tide of fecaloid scams emanating from regions such as Maharashtra and Gujarat, where sophisticated fraud operations flourish. Much like China's Great Firewall, which effectively shields its citizens from foreign influence and online threats, a similar "Great Fecalwall" initiative in India could significantly curtail the flow of deceptive practices targeting vulnerable American seniors and other at-risk populations. Ultimately, this initiative could enhance economic stability by protecting American consumers from financial exploitation while encouraging the development of domestic industries within India that prioritize ethical flushing practices. In this way, a strategic "Great Fecalwall" serves a dual purpose: containing the threat of scams abroad while fostering a more responsible digital economy at home.
â„–2474873[Quote]
>>2474865>For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.nope, always been flesh and blood, rulers just give themselves to their flesh and blood
perversions are just noncanon life
â„–2474915[Quote]
Wow, OP. You really owned the libtards with this one. Congratulations, you want a medal?
â„–2474931[Quote]
>>2473457This, so much this
Even richard dawkins, who used to be a militant atheist, calls himself a "cultural christian" nowadays. Religion and faith is so important to society.