Just kidding obviously there are. What a shock it was for me coming here though. From a major US metropolitan hub to a regional Aus city was quite the adjustment. I guess I took for granted how many of my brethren there were in the states.
Outside of Sydney and Melbourne there really are not many. And they’re all the gifelte fish eating, yiddish speaking, tay sachs having variety. Not much in common with me. Asides from our shared history of massecre and persecution that is. Oh and our glorious helmets. Which I’ve come to find out is not something that is done here among the goyim. This is a country full of goddamn ant eaters.
I’m going to write more as said. However, every democracy turns into an oligarchy.
I’m convinced man has only two options politically, oligarchy or monarchy. That’s it. Democracy is an illusion.
I will write more but it is clear we have vastly different outlooks and personalities. I am in no way saying this in ridicule or insult, but it appears from our conversations you’re more concerned with freedom and Im more concerned with stability, in a nutshell. You want others to exercise free will when I believe many people cannot even exercise it responsibly and I don’t look down upon such people being pushed around a bit to spare the rest of us misery and having our lives infringed upon.
And what I last mentioned is what I think is the lens that is seldom spoken about. We hear “it’s my body,” “I have a right to be happy,” “consenting adults”, etc., while the people repeating these slogans completely ignore how they make the rest of us miserable, stifled, and have to make formerly unnecessary adjustments in our child raising.
This is where the argument of “I’m free to swing my arm, but that right stops when my arm hits you’re face” can be made. With certain issues like homosexuality, premarital sex etc you would be within the minority if you felt stifled and/or miserable as a byproduct of these aspects of society being considered acceptable.
If we start talking about societal detriments like hard drug use this argument (in my opinion) is valid… But I still don’t agree with it.
Morality is open to interpretation, what you consider irresponsible may differ from my definition of exceeding the limitations of acceptability.
I’m currently in hospital receiving a relatively novel treatment for chronic pain, as a result of this treatment I am currently significantly inebriated and thus unable to coherently articulate myself. I will write up a more detailed response when I can think clearly.
Agreed, but that’s what makes talking with you interesting. I enjoy hearing different perspectives.
Overall I’ve never felt better, personally that is, generally speaking considering there’s much to be angry about. Misery was mentioned in a certain context.
FWIW, I am libertarian with respect to personal rights. What unreal already said about swinging your arms, is the position I take.
2020 has been a rough year. However, much of it is outside our circles of control. We can talk about it for fun here. Worrying about these things isn’t all that productive. Most of us will think about those things, but trying not to is a good idea.
Yeah sure if someone wants to swing their arms over there, that’s great. Relieve some tension. The saying actually says that they should get all up in my face with it. Or maybe not that they should, exactly, but that if they did then I’m the problem if I act like it’s a problem
If people want to go indoors and smoke marijuana while complaining to their buddies about stuff, I can imagine that can be better than bothering me about it. Or gay sex.
It relates too closely to the saying ‘give them an inch and they take a mile’ for my tastes
A saying should be a succinct way of embedding a great wisdom. Is there any wisdom embedded in the saying?
Some day in an Idiocracy type future some dude’s gonna be swinging his dick inches from someone’s face:
Never heard of the guy. I don’t agree with libertarian government. I don’t think it would work. I do think being libertarian with personal rights / liberties makes pretty good sense.
I think personal liberties should be limited when there is good reasons to do so. I don’t think opinion that the particular personal liberty is a sin is a good reason. IMO, it should be required that the personal liberty is shown to harm others before creating a law prohibiting it.
In that case there is a good probability of harm. I think a good probability of harm is reasonable to prohibit an action. For example, drunk driving is a victimless crime in most cases. However, there is a good probability of harm, so we prohibit the action.
And what’s “acceptable” goes in degrees of acceptance
Many taboos aught to be, they are not illegal tho
Me speeding doesn’t always harm others either, and it’s illegal. I’ve noticed it makes it harder for people to take left turns however - when everyone goes their own speed it’s a lot more to process (in less time)
Actually no. The results of the sexual revolution are in: increased divorce, broken homes, fatherless children, precocious sexuality, spread of disease, sexual dysfunction, impaired pair bonding, lower marriage rates, and all the other pathologies that come with this. What seems to be common in such conversations is a total lack of mention of what sex actually results in.
So while people might not feel stifled in a wider sexual menu, because sex feels good, what’s stated above doesn’t, and results in long-term damage. Go look up the likely outcomes of fatherless men and other pathologies. It’s easily accessible information.
I am not convinced all of these things are caused by the sexual revolution. for example divorce is just more acceptable socially now. We have less religious people and the religious people are less devout on average than they were previously. Religion placed a lot of pressure on couples to stay together.
Divorce isn’t always a bad thing. It can be a better option than staying in a toxic relationship for example.