Sexuality, Human Expression, and Personhood

[Novia Soviet Socialist Republic]

Well that's too bad because the only way for the "sexual revolution" to end is to either wait long enough for it to die off (I doubt it will.), or have the corrupt American system suppress the freedoms of everyone. To achieve the latter one would have to somehow make the Republican party more likeable, which is difficult if not impossible when they're reasoning and choice of words are either selfish, poorly thought out, or both.

By the way you'll need a government in order to actually enforce this morality crap. Opposing the size of government is actually running counter to your requirements of a morality-enforced society, especially when the majority of society is becoming more and more liberal. Now I know you're talking specifically about the federal government, but who else could do it? I doubt your state government will be able to without some form of interference from the government.

Yes, the Republican party needs a new leader to restore it's former glory. Where could that man be?

That's a trick question. There isn't one.

[Shie]

They're robbers.

I've got the oddest image of highwayman professors.

"Your epistemological certainty or your life!"

Philosophy professors are brilliant scam artists. People actually pay for those courses!

[Liriena]

Now I see why professors in my faculty hate Positivism's guts.

They're robbers.

Gosh, I love slander.

[Liriena]

I've got the oddest image of highwayman professors.

"Your epistemological certainty or your life!"

Philosophy professors are brilliant scam artists. People actually pay for those courses!

Disregarding the fact that I don't attend Philosophy classes, since I'm studying Social Communications, that's yet another beautifully slanderous claim on your part.

[Shie]

Yes, the Republican party needs a new leader to restore it's former glory. Where could that man be?

That's a trick question. There isn't one.

Señor Rubio!

He's intelligent and charismatic enough to run.

[Shie]

Philosophy professors are brilliant scam artists. People actually pay for those courses!

Disregarding the fact that I don't attend Philosophy classes, since I'm studying Social Communications, that's yet another beautifully slanderous claim on your part.

I said nothing about you; I'm saying philosophy is silly.

[Liriena]

That's a trick question. There isn't one.

Señor Rubio!
He's intelligent and charismatic enough to run.

Ah, yes, because perpetuating right-wing lies and giving us one of the most hilariously amateurish responses to a state of the Union address in American history is a clear sign of him having the intelligence and charisma to run for the presidency.

Do you honestly expect this one-hit non-wonder to become president in a race against Hillary Clinton?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

That's a trick question. There isn't one.

Señor Rubio!

He's intelligent and charismatic enough to run.

Even U.S. Latinos think he's a douche. He doesn't stand a chance.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Disregarding the fact that I don't attend Philosophy classes, since I'm studying Social Communications, that's yet another beautifully slanderous claim on your part.

I said nothing about you; I'm saying philosophy is silly.

>Claims philosophy is silly
>He's talking about morality, and morality discourses are part of philosophy

Does someone see the irony in this or is it just me?

[Liriena]

Disregarding the fact that I don't attend Philosophy classes, since I'm studying Social Communications, that's yet another beautifully slanderous claim on your part.

I said nothing about you; I'm saying philosophy is silly.

I know you didn't say anything about me. I am saying that you very blatantly slandered Philosophy professors by calling them scam artists, a claim apparently inspired by your ignorance in that particular discipline.

Philosophy is not the least bit silly. It's the mother of all sciences, home to the works of brilliant minds such as Marx, Locke, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Bacon, Plato, Montesquieu and Hegel... but apparently that's all argle bargle, huh?

[Liriena]

I said nothing about you; I'm saying philosophy is silly.

>Claims philosophy is silly
>He's talking about morality, and morality discourses are part of philosophy

Does someone see the irony in this or is it just me?

I see more irony in someone claiming Philosophy, of all disciplines, is "silly".

[Novia Soviet Socialist Republic]

That's a trick question. There isn't one.

Señor Rubio!

He's intelligent and charismatic enough to run.

I don't know.

He looks like a bit of a wanker and judging by the fact that he's a republican he probably is a wanker.

[Shie]

Señor Rubio!
He's intelligent and charismatic enough to run.

Ah, yes, because perpetuating right-wing lies and giving us one of the most hilariously amateurish responses to a state of the Union address in American history is a clear sign of him having the intelligence and charisma to run for the presidency.

Do you honestly expect this one-hit non-wonder to become president in a race against Hillary Clinton?

Marco Rubio has widespread appeal, he'll get the immigrant vote because his family aren't WASP and he'll get the Catholic vote because he's stayed consistent with his beliefs. Hilary Clinton is an ambitious woman, and a loyal wife but the female voters are more likely to vote for Rubio because his family values offer a sense of predictable stability in a globalized world where we're above helping thy neighbor.


There's also a good case for Jeb Bush.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Ah, yes, because perpetuating right-wing lies and giving us one of the most hilariously amateurish responses to a state of the Union address in American history is a clear sign of him having the intelligence and charisma to run for the presidency.

Do you honestly expect this one-hit non-wonder to become president in a race against Hillary Clinton?

Marco Rubio has widespread appeal, he'll get the immigrant vote because his family aren't WASP and he'll get the Catholic vote because he's stayed consistent with his beliefs. Hilary Clinton is an ambitious woman, and a loyal wife but the female voters are more likely to vote for Rubio because his family values offer a sense of predictable stability in a globalized world where we're above helping thy neighbor.

He already lost the immigrant vote back in 2008.

[Liriena]

Ah, yes, because perpetuating right-wing lies and giving us one of the most hilariously amateurish responses to a state of the Union address in American history is a clear sign of him having the intelligence and charisma to run for the presidency.

Do you honestly expect this one-hit non-wonder to become president in a race against Hillary Clinton?

Marco Rubio has widespread appeal, he'll get the immigrant vote because his family aren't WASP and he'll get the Catholic vote because he's stayed consistent with his beliefs. Hilary Clinton is an ambitious woman, and a loyal wife but the female voters are more likely to vote for Rubio because his family values offer a sense of predictable stability in a globalized world where we're above helping thy neighbor.

I can't help but feel that your predictions may have come from some dark, foul cavity that is supposedly meant for the excretion of solid substances and love making.

[Liriena]

Marco Rubio has widespread appeal, he'll get the immigrant vote because his family aren't WASP and he'll get the Catholic vote because he's stayed consistent with his beliefs. Hilary Clinton is an ambitious woman, and a loyal wife but the female voters are more likely to vote for Rubio because his family values offer a sense of predictable stability in a globalized world where we're above helping thy neighbor.

He already lost the immigrant vote back in 2008.

And the last devoted Catholic republican candidate (whose name must not be googled) was remarkably unpopular amongst Catholic voters.

As for the female vote... yeah, I'm sure the women who his party has worked really hard to deny them their human rights will be eager to vote for Rubio.

[Shie]

>Claims philosophy is silly
>He's talking about morality, and morality discourses are part of philosophy

Does someone see the irony in this or is it just me?

I see more irony in someone claiming Philosophy, of all disciplines, is "silly".

STEM is the only reason anybody should be going to college.
America was number one once, let's bring it back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zqOYBabXmA

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I see more irony in someone claiming Philosophy, of all disciplines, is "silly".

STEM is the only reason anybody should be going to college.
America was number one once, let's bring it back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zqOYBabXmA

Uhmm... No. Sorry but the Arts and Humanities are not going anywhere.

[Liriena]

I see more irony in someone claiming Philosophy, of all disciplines, is "silly".

STEM is the only reason anybody should be going to college.

Funny how, by definition, Philosophy would fall under the umbrella of STEM, alongside sociology, semiotics and whatnot, given that that they all are social sciences.

Furthermore, what about history, art, literature, law and medicine? Do you think those careers serve no purposes in the greater scheme of things? Do you think colleges should be banned from teaching any of these disciplines?

America was number one once, let's bring it back.

You are not going to "bring it back" by being a fascist pedant with simplistic ideas.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zqOYBabXmA

Is this video supposed to make your post more emotionally appealing or something? Because, in truth, it comes off as desperate and amateurish.

[Shie]

STEM is the only reason anybody should be going to college.
America was number one once, let's bring it back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zqOYBabXmA

Uhmm... No. Sorry but the Arts and Humanities are not going anywhere.

Art is a leisure activity, not work.

Even President Bush paints in his free time.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Uhmm... No. Sorry but the Arts and Humanities are not going anywhere.

Art is a leisure activity, not work.

You obviously have never met a web designer or marketing artist in your life, have you?

[Liriena]

Uhmm... No. Sorry but the Arts and Humanities are not going anywhere.

Art is a leisure activity, not work.

No, art is one of the defining characteristics of the human species. It's an entity with high historical, sociological and anthropological value. Not to mention the fact that, in the case of music, cinema, theatre and video games, art is a prolific industry. Art requires a method, a theory and an awful lot of practise. Art is deep and worthy of analysis, for it often is a reflection of its time and space.

Quite frankly, I find your snobbery insulting to both the artist and the scientist in me. To the former, because it deprecates my effort, and that of the millions of artists I admire, and to the latter, because it perpetuates the noxious stereotype of arrogant scientists who believe only their specific disciplines are worthy of being studied.

[Liriena]

Art is a leisure activity, not work.

You obviously have never met a web designer or marketing artist in your life, have you?

Or anybody working for the film or video game industries, apparently.

Well, maybe games do spontaneously come into existence or... I don't know... grow on farms owned by Electronic Arts.

[Shie]

STEM is the only reason anybody should be going to college.

Funny how, by definition, Philosophy would fall under the umbrella of STEM, alongside sociology, semiotics and whatnot, given that that they all are social sciences.

Furthermore, what about history, art, literature, law and medicine? Do you think those careers serve no purposes in the greater scheme of things? Do you think colleges should be banned from teaching any of these disciplines?

The only lesson you need to learn from history is that nobody ever learns from it anyways. Art is a leisure activity, not a profession. Literature is something to be appreciated for private amusement. Law, law doesn't make people moral. Law enforcement makes people moral. Medicine, that's a totally necessary profession for any society to progress.

You are not going to "bring it back" by being a fascist pedant with simplistic ideas.

I don't think you know what fascism is, I don't support monstrosity or racist policy.

I'm for the government stopping subjective activity. I'm in favor of mass liberty and I support the troops. I want local defense, I want to see religious freedom. I believe in ideas which unite people. I'm for strong leadership. I think patriotism is important, if not paramount. I'm in favor of the press's freedom to be honest when expressing opinions. I'm in favor of a country that supports it's own. I support leadership that has a direction. I'm a huge supporter of media that has a goal, instead of nonsense articles pushed out by journalists to make a buck. I love groups that build trust for our youth. I love mass rallies and parades that foster support among the people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zqOYBabXmA

Is this video supposed to make your post more emotionally appealing or something? Because, in truth, it comes off as desperate and amateurish.

It was supposed to make my post true.

[Liriena]

Funny how, by definition, Philosophy would fall under the umbrella of STEM, alongside sociology, semiotics and whatnot, given that that they all are social sciences.

Furthermore, what about history, art, literature, law and medicine? Do you think those careers serve no purposes in the greater scheme of things? Do you think colleges should be banned from teaching any of these disciplines?

The only lesson you need to learn from history is that nobody ever learns from it anyways.

Says you, and no offense, but I can't bring myself to take anything you say at face value.

Art is a leisure activity, not a profession.

Except, you know, for the millions of artists working in the film, theatre, video game, television and music industries.

Literature is something to be appreciated for private amusement.

That's your personal opinion, not an established fact.

Law, law doesn't make people moral. Law enforcement makes people moral.

You do realize that, when I said "law", I meant the study of human law, the discipline where lawyers come from.

Medicine, that's a totally necessary profession for any society to progress.

Wow, finally something we can both agree on.

You are not going to "bring it back" by being a fascist pedant with simplistic ideas.

I don't think you know what fascism is, I don't support monstrosity or racist policy.

Fascism is not an inherently racist ideology. A man can be a fascist without being racist, and you need not look any farther than Pinochet and Videla to see that.

I'm for the government stopping subjective activity.

"Subjective activity"? Is this some bizarre term you yourself concocted? I know of a few definitions for the word "subjective", and I don't think any of them fit in your arguments.

I'm in favor of mass liberty and I support the troops.

1. And by "mass liberty" you mean...?
2. We both know that by "support the troops" you mean jingoism.

I want local defense,

If by "local defense" you mean a military to defend your nation, I think everyone except Costa Rica would agree with you.

I want to see religious freedom.

Provided your concept of religious freedom isn't actually an euphemism for christian dominionism, but rather actual religious freedom as the one the American Constitution already guarantees, but that christians in several states don't seem to give a shit about... we're cool.

I believe in ideas which unite people. I'm for strong leadership. I think patriotism is important, if not paramount.

All of which are core tenets of fascism.

I'm in favor of the press's freedom to be honest when expressing opinions.

Given your previous history on matters of the press, I'm calling bullshit on this one.

I'm in favor of a country that supports it's own.

So do most human beings... although I get the feeling there's an isolationist edge to your idea of a country that supports its own.

I support leadership that has a direction.

Meaning a dictatorship.

I'm a huge supporter of media that has a goal, instead of nonsense articles pushed out by journalists to make a buck.

Meaning no actual freedom of the press.

I love groups that build trust for our youth. I love mass rallies and parades that foster support among the people.

Must... not... Godwin...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zqOYBabXmA

Is this video supposed to make your post more emotionally appealing or something? Because, in truth, it comes off as desperate and amateurish.

It was supposed to make my post true.

It didn't. It just made it, as I said before, feel quite amateurish.