The subversive 2nd Amendment

MarcusA said:
If Hitler had thrown them in the oven not much of value would have been lost; sadly he wasted his time on Jews and Gypsies.

But there's no society where freaks who admit they can't "get laid" without rape, or want consent laws abolished so they can rape underage girls wouldn't have been "defectives" of some kind or another; the status of "people" like that in prisons should be a good indicator of where they fit into evolution's natural hierarchy.
Click to expand...

you sir are fucking nuts,,,
 
MarcusA said:
Sadly, the 2nd Amendment in its current incarnation is subversive and repealing it may be needed; this should be future legislation on gun-ownership in America, as well as Western Europe

1. Membership in a right-wing, nationalist party should be required for gun ownership; this would help prevent subversives and degenerates from owning guns.

2. Women should not be allowed to own guns unless they can prove it is necessary for self-defense; such a thing helps subvert man's natural dominance over them. Only one who is physically fit enough to serve in combat (which 99% of women aren't) should be allowed to own a gun without severe restrictions (ideally, all public and private schools will be converted into military academies with mandatory right-wing nationalist curriculum, so all males with membership in the majority or national party who pass fitness standards would, be ideally able to own them upon graduation).

3. Minorities with high rates of crime should be profiled by the state and disallowed to own guns; or at very least, profiled stricter; as this allows potentially dangerous minority elements to subvert their natural rulers.

---

This would, of course be a much better right-wing nationalist platform to run on; the 2nd Amendment in its current state is archaic and subversive and should no longer be used and abused to grant subversive "rights" to people, or potentially empower the degenerate, the immoral, the underclass, the values of radical feminism - against their enlightened and natural rulers.
Click to expand...

Good evening, Goebbels.
 
MarcusA said:
If being "beta" gets you actual sex, and being "alpha" gets you stuck pleasing your mom or female employers to finance your anime porn subscription, then obviously "beta" is superior, evolutionary or otherwise.
Click to expand...

yeah. but its not. beta is parroting purple hair lesbians like a true simp.
 
StoneByStone said:
Are you an Incel?
Click to expand...

We got ourselves a troll that seems to be trying to cover all bases left and right. He's going at it hard though and isn't believable enough to cause an uproar. It would have helped if every discussion he posted wasn't the same troll bait tactic. It was apparent by the third discussion posted. The poster reminds me of someone called Paro. He used to just say the most blatant sexist an asshole things to bait people.
 
AssHatZombie said:
fixed your username.
Click to expand...
Right, I'm sure you think a Biblical king with 100s of wives or concubines is a 'purple-haired lesbian'.

(Hint, it's just evolution hating you, the fact that everyone from Biblical patriarchs to purple-haired lesbians agree on something is just further evolutionary proof of this):

15 When the turn came for Esther (the young woman Mordecai had adopted, the daughter of his uncle Abihail) to go to the king, she asked for nothing other than what Hegai, the king’s eunuch who was in charge of the harem, suggested. And Esther won the favor of everyone who saw her.

https://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/eunuchs-in-the-bible/

So nope, a Biblical patriarch wouldn't have bothered with your pussy-footed, feminist notions of "equality, identity, rights" and so forth, they would've just lopped your nuts off to assert their dominance and "alpha-ness" and forced you to serve their queen or concubines in the harem
 
AssHatZombie said:
yeah. but its not. beta is parroting purple hair lesbians like a true simp.
Click to expand...
I'll parrot whoever I damn well want, and I'll still be having more sex with more attractive women than you.

You're a fool if you think there are any "rules"; there aren't all that matters is what works (if it didn't work, people wouldn't do it).

You'll keep parroting your nonsense and only pleasing your mom and female employers to pay for your anime porn subscriptions, while I get actual sex with comparatively hotter chicks. (Not to mention chicks who try to "please" me into fucking them instead of their husband).

So no, as far as evolution is concerned, you're out of the game.
 
Crocodile said:
We got ourselves a troll that seems to be trying to cover all bases left and right. He's going at it hard though and isn't believable enough to cause an uproar. It would have helped if every discussion he posted wasn't the same troll bait tactic. It was apparent by the third discussion posted. The poster reminds me of someone called Paro. He used to just say the most blatant sexist an asshole things to bait people.
Click to expand...
So I'm good at satirizing both the left and right? Thanks for the compliment then...lol
 
MarcusA said:
B.S.

They admit to being proud consumers of porn and smut.

Their worldview is that they are "entitled" to sex; their worldview is that the only purpose of life is sex, porn and masturbation.
Click to expand...

That's definitely not true. Incels think that marriage and sex are important parts of life, not the only thing, but important parts. And they think that porn and women's rights have ruined relationships in the West. Nick Fuentes is an Incel and this is his view. I can't think of a single prominent Incel who thinks the way you say they do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incel

"Opposition to feminism and women's rights is commonplace, and some posters blame women's liberation for their inability to find a partner.[54] Some incels believe that there was a golden age in which couples married early, were strictly monogamous, and adhered to traditional gender roles, and that looks played less of a role in romantic pairings and mens' "entitlement" to sex with women was never denied.[20][55]"

Incels are Rad Trads. They believe in traditional gender roles and strict monogamy.

There's no silly idea over "dominance" to begin with, this was merely asserting a physical difference - in the context hierarchy, politics, and so forth, there have always been "dominant" men and women, whether rulers or otherwise.
Click to expand...

So if the difference is only physical, why should women not be allowed to own guns? What is the point of this?

So no, you're being a fool - incels and everything their little freakshow stands for is a symptom of degenerate, consumerist filth and bestial left-wing worldviews. And yeah, Hitler would have thrown them into an oven along with other "defectives".
Click to expand...

These kind of people have always been around. The reason they were able to get laid in the past is because women didn't have rights. They had no choice but to marry a man for survival. Today women have more choices, which leaves a lot of men single. So I do agree with you on one point. The left-wing idea of women's rights is responsible for the Incels. However, taking rights away from women isn't right right way to fix this.
 
Crocodile said:
We got ourselves a troll that seems to be trying to cover all bases left and right. He's going at it hard though and isn't believable enough to cause an uproar. It would have helped if every discussion he posted wasn't the same troll bait tactic. It was apparent by the third discussion posted. The poster reminds me of someone called Paro. He used to just say the most blatant sexist an asshole things to bait people.
Click to expand...

TBH, the things he's saying are often said unironically by lots of Rad Trads. So while he could be a troll, I wouldn't be surprised if he was serious, as these are common beliefs on the Right.
America is moving to the Left, but the Right is going further Right.
 
there are nofappers. they save their vital essence by not masturbating.

could be something to it. I've been too tired to jack off before. it rings true. like, after a giant bong rip.
 
MarcusA said:
Right, I'm sure you think a Biblical king with 100s of wives or concubines is a 'purple-haired lesbian'.

(Hint, it's just evolution hating you, the fact that everyone from Biblical patriarchs to purple-haired lesbians agree on something is just further evolutionary proof of this):

15 When the turn came for Esther (the young woman Mordecai had adopted, the daughter of his uncle Abihail) to go to the king, she asked for nothing other than what Hegai, the king’s eunuch who was in charge of the harem, suggested. And Esther won the favor of everyone who saw her.

https://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/eunuchs-in-the-bible/

So nope, a Biblical patriarch wouldn't have bothered with your pussy-footed, feminist notions of "equality, identity, rights" and so forth, they would've just lopped your nuts off to assert their dominance and "alpha-ness" and forced you to serve their queen or concubines in the harem
Click to expand...

there were slaves too. should we have slavery?
 
you don't have to asssert your dominance by being a dick all the time.

let people struggle through. inferior people find love and happiness. can accomplish great things. god loves all of them. they contribute. there are many criteria on which to consider a person.



you're really just a busy body parasitic control freak who is just trying to justify his predilection for human on human predation. who hurt you? hurt people hurt people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top