William Luther Pierce #racist #psycho #sexist #wingnut #dunning-kruger forums.spacebattles.com

Liberalism is an essentially feminine, submissive world view. Perhaps a better adjective than feminine is infantile. It is the world view of men who do not have the moral toughness, the spiritual strength to stand up and do single combat with life, who cannot adjust to the reality that the world is not a huge, pink-and-blue, padded nursery in which the lions lie down with the lambs and everyone lives happily ever after.

Nor should spiritually healthy men of our race even want the world to be like that, if it could be so. That is an alien, essentially Oriental approach to life, the world view of slaves rather than of free men of the West.

But it has permeated our whole society. Even those who do not consciously accept the liberal doctrines have been corrupted by them. Decade after decade the race problem in America has become worse. But the majority of those who wanted a solution, who

wanted to preserve a White America, were never able to screw up the courage to look the obvious solutions in the face.

All the liberals and the Jews had to do was begin screeching about "inhumanity" or "injustice" or "genocide," and most of our people who had been beating around the edges of a solution took to their heels like frightened rabbits. Because there was never a way to solve the race problem which would be "fair for everybody or which everyone concerned could be politely persuaded into accepting without any fuss or unpleasantness, they kept trying to evade it, hoping that it would go away by itself. And the same has been true of the Jewish problem and the immigration problem and the overpopulation problem and the eugenics problem and a thousand related problems.

Stargazer #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

So I started this discussion on my social media and I thought I'd bring it here because I find it interesting.

I'm starting to think there may be no such thing as an atheist. That is to say, there is no such thing as a person who lives consistently with an atheist worldview, the belief that there is no God.

If there is no God, there can be no ultimate right or wrong. Atheists will affirm that, they will say that morality is relative. But I don't believe they live that way. I believe there are certain moral situations that atheists will reject any possibility of them ever seeing it as right. They know in their heart of hearts that it's wrong. It wouldn't matter if the rest of the society they lived in all agreed, it wouldn't matter what science said, their position would not change. But what is their rational basis for that attitude? It flies in the face of the moral relativism they affirm. If there are things that they would never see as right, they are asserting that the morality relating to those things is, in actuality, objective.

You don't get that from an atheistic worldview. There can be no ultimate right or wrong. In order to make objective moral statements, you need to have an objective moral basis, an ultimate right or wrong, to make them from. You get that from a theistic worldview, specifically one where there is an ultimate authority to define right and wrong and that authority has clearly revealed it, as is the case in the Biblical Christian worldview. So, atheists will claim that morality is relative because their worldview requires it, but when it comes down to it, they will borrow from, operate under, the Christian worldview. They will not act like atheists.

Toxicology of Friendship Award

Zorlon #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

This is just idle morbid curiosity, not a real thing I've been told.

Say one night he confesses to you that he was waiting for a train late one night when there was only one other person at the station, and he got to wondering what it would be like to kill a man, so he strangled the guy and buried him in a shallow grave under the platform.

Other than that he's been a very good friend and you have no fear he'd randomly kill you, though he might kill again.

Would you turn him in?


It would suck, but how could you not?

I don't know, but my friendships are less based on how decent my friends are as human beings, and more on how decent they are as friends to me.

I don't know what i would do, but I can see myself doing nothing.

Ladiesman #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

As a hypothetical since this has piqued my curiosity. What if a close friend or family member revealed they were a child killer (or child molestor even)? Snitchable?

Family member? No. Although it would bring with it some serious issues.

Friend? I dunno. It depends. Depends on the friend, first off. Then it depends on what they did. My friend comes to me and says he touched a little kid or something? No, i'm not turning him in, but i'll smack him in the head. Raped a kid? Still no, but it's probably going to end the friendship. Killed a kid? I...don't know. It sort of depends on the situation and how it comes out. If comes out completely nonchalant and remorseful...I might, only for fear of him doing it again. If he sounded genuinely disturbed and remorseful about what he did, then no. He already has to live with it. I'm not gonna be his friend anymore either, but i'm not gonna turn him in.

It basically comes down to that according to me, myself, my family, and my friends are more important than random other people. This isn't saying everyone I know has free reign to whatever they want in my mind, but it is saying that i'm going to put their best interests before anyone elses, including society as a whole.

Let's say some crazy disaster occurred. My family and close friends are safe, along with me. We're pretty hungry. I go out and find a buttload of food. Along the way, I find a large group of people who are starving. Am I going to give them the food I found? No. It's going to my family and friends. Now, I DO actually believe in helping people so after my friends and families needs have been met, if I have an overabundance, I would try to help out those people, but I have to look out for what's important to me first.

It's really the same thing. I don't know random dude at train station. I DO know my friend, very well. I'm sad that random dude died, and i'm disgusted with my friend, but i'm not going to contribute to something that is going to put him behind bars or be executed. I won't cause suffering to my friend.

Ladiesman, I´m sorry, but that´s incredbly fucked up.

My friends and family are literally the most important thing in the world to me. There is nothing, NOTHING more important than them. I would protect them to the death. I won't let them go to the jail if I have any power over it. I will not let them be executed. They are number 1. That's where my loyalty lies. Without my friends and family, I have nothing.

Honestly, it would probably go further than "not telling the police", especially if it were family. I'd probably help dispose of the body. Family and friends come first, period. End of discussion. I don't care what they did.

Zorlon #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

1:For whatever reason(s) white people are generally smarter than black people.
1a: Smart black people are always smarter than dumb white people.
1c: Any difference between race is dwarfed dy differences between individuals.
1d: Thus racism is a dead end, be elitist, and stick with those as good as you to breed superoffspring and improve the genepool.

2There is not and never was a nation known as Palestine.

3: Right or wrong I dislike the idea of slavery reparations just because it would be bad for the nation.

4: Life does begin at conception, but stemcell research is important.... thus I advocate murder for medical research.

5:Nobody said "Don't go to war with the Nazi's because surely not all Germans support them". It's clear most of the Arab world supports the terrorists against America&Isreal.... things would get better if America and Isreal stopped being so gentle.

6: My best friend could tell me he raped and killed a stranger and I would do nothing but ask him not to do it again.

7: Age of consent laws, anti-dueling laws, anti-drinking in public laws etc.., would all be unessecary if not for fuckwit jackass losers would abuse their liberty to have a relationship with whomever they wish, settle differences in any way satisfying, and celebrate where they please.

8:Unversal voting rights may not be a good thing, and if not for fuckwit Jimcrow rascist asswipes we could probably have some sort of standards in place right now.

9: Most people are sheep. Conformist sheep.

David Khoo #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

In some remote southern regions of Malawi, it's traditional for girls to be made to have sex with a paid sex worker known as a "hyena" once they reach puberty. The act is not seen by village elders as rape, but as a form of ritual "cleansing". However, as Ed Butler reports, it has the potential to be the opposite of cleansing - a way of spreading disease.


And most shockingly, here in Nsanje, teenage girls, after their first menstruation, are made to have sex over a three-day period, to mark their passage from childhood to womanhood. If the girls refuse, it's believed, disease or some fatal misfortune could befall their families or the village as a whole.

"Most of those I have slept with are girls, school-going girls," Aniva tells me.

"Some girls are just 12 or 13 years old, but I prefer them older. All these girls find pleasure in having me as their hyena. They actually are proud and tell other people that this man is a real man, he knows how to please a woman."


It's clear, given the hyena's duties, that HIV is a huge risk to the community. The UN estimates that one in 10 of all Malawians carry the virus, so I ask Aniva if he is HIV-positive. He astounds me by saying that he is - and that he doesn't mention this to a girl's parents when they hire him.

A very interesting article throughout. To be clear, later on it is pointed out that this is a dying practice that is condemned by the government and church in Malawi. I see this mainly as an example of how shockingly different cultures can be and how resistant to change they are. While I am sure that the thread will have a lot of flatly racist comments about how primitive and benighted these people are, I think it is important to be humble and not miss the log in our own eye while pointing out the speck in someone else's. Our own cultures have their own stubborn flaws, and the wise thing to draw from articles like these is the importance of self-reflection.

Wow... A literal thread about cultural child rape, but quick... Someone might judge them! Let's premptively call anyone so inclined a racist. Your a piece of work aren't you.

To be clear, I think that what they are doing is horrible. However, I believe in hating the sin but loving the sinner and "judge not lest ye be judged". If you read the article, the parents do this out of the honest, heartfelt belief that it is the best thing for their daughters. I think they are wrong, but as a parent myself I can relate to the intention even if I am horrified by where it has taken them. I certainly do not see them as monsters or bad people, even if they are doing very bad things. I just hope that I am not harming my own children when I do what I do for them out of my own honest, heartfelt desire to give them the best.

And as for preempting racism in this thread, let's be honest here. If you've been on SB for even a little while, you know where threads on hot button issues like this lead. Pedophilia + Africa + Cultural differences = Torrents of shitposts on SB. Not everyone who is horrified by this is a racist, but threads like these DO bring out the racists and ITGs.

PersonGuy #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

Really fuggen crazy stuff going on today, I mean doing it in public and going after someone older then you in a way that would likely make them significantly physically stronger, its amazing she was actually able to do the deed.

"It's hardly unique for women to rape men; I know at one man personally who was raped by a cousin when he was a teenager.

As for strength; she had a knife. Muscles don't matter nearly as much as many people like to think."

"Anyway I hope she gets punished as harshly as a man would if the situation was reversed. She used the threat of physical violence to sexual assault a person. That shouldn't be okay in anyone's book. I just hope the guy is receiving proper care and isn't being pressured into ignoring it because its viewed as unmanly to be traumatized by something like that.

"pretty much people are so used to guns deaths they forget about the ye old ways to die by bladed implement which was the primary weapon since as long as man figured out a sharpened stick or rock was more effective at death dealing than a blunt tool.

the only reason a sharp melee weapon isn't the standard weapon anymore is because it requires skill to do anything more than flail about and hope to nick or poke something good and vital while a firearm is pretty much point and shoot and most of the time you don't need to repeat."

It's more that doing the deed would involve lots of... grappling, and would consequently leave many opportunities for him to try and seize the knife from her.

cmdrjones #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

Atheists have constitutional rights by being citizens, but by denying the existence of a creator no one with two brain cells to run together would trust that they would respect anyone else's rights. So, they simply should never be afforded political power... What with their miserable track record and so on.

Separation of church and state is doggerel from a letter by Jefferson and has no more the force of law than the inane scribblings of a Jew British subject from the 19th century

If rights can be rescinded by a government, then they aren't inalienable now are they?

Imperator Pax #racist forums.spacebattles.com

["Face it, history proves that the only way the South was *ever* going to give up Slavery was at the point of a gun after a long war.

So John Brown and Co. might have been misguided by scope or strategy, but they were entirely correct on principle.

At that point, its hard to argue that if they had successfully triggered a civil war earlier, that it would have been somehow WORSE than the civil war for happening sooner."]

No it fucking wouldn't have you ignorant fuck

Harper's ferry going as planned would have resulted in the extermination of the US slave population by the Federal Army. Harper Ferry was a Federal Arsenal. So yeah congratulations slavery is done, but only because they're all dead. You want to find out what happens when a slave revolt sucessfully happens its not freedom its the government going in and decimating the slaves with superiro weapons and manpower

Spartacus's revolting slaves were crucified by the romans, haiti came at the end of French cannons. Worse still you hair brained idgetry will result in the army being used to hunt down abolitionists. On the plus side congratulations the army is getting a budget bump and their is an increase in federal power.

Fell #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

[ Why is rape considered evil?]

A variety of factors. Part of it is reasonable, modern female empowerment. Part of it is ancient, outmoded "Sacred Feminine" bullshit. Yet another part is even more outmoded, frankly offensive 'Sacred virginity' tradition.

I really, really hate this discussion, because my opinion on it makes it seem like I hate women or something, and I really don't. But I don't think rape is nearly as heinous a crime as people think it is. It's awful, certainly, but for some reason we've elevated it to one of the worst things a person can do, and I think that reputation that it has ends up making it's victims suffer more than if it were considered only slightly worse than normal assault.

[So you see it as society trying to make a crime especially heinous because society says it is a especially heinous crime?]

Basically, yes. I think it persists via cultural inertia going back a long, long time. The reasoning behind it has changed, but the cultural meme has remained largely the same. For whatever reason, we've essentially declared vaginas sacred and we see those who "Desecrate" them as a special kind of evil; it's the kind of emotional response we usually reserve for people who hurt children, or who torture people.

I honestly think it's a sexist idea. That women are these precious, fragile jewels that need harsh laws and big strong men to protect their sacred genitalia.

Yes, rape is absolutely wrong. But the degree of emotional response we have for it is completely out of proportion to the actual severity of the violation. And I think it hurts women.

[How many people suffer life long psychological trauma from getting punched or kicked a few times?]

I imagine if you were told your entire life that punching you in the face was the most awful act anyone could do to you, you'd find it pretty traumatic if you ended up getting punched in the face.

You're also missing the point; there are many different situations in which rape is entirely non-traumatic. A date rape victim could go their entire life not knowing they'd ever been raped, but if they found out about it, it's still treated with as much vitriol as if they'd been bludgeoned, held down, and violated in the street.

[Your inflicting pain and suffering on some one for a sex /power kick.
You can't come up with any justification for it.]

And all the various kinds of rape where the victim doesn't suffer, and may in fact be entirely unaware of what happened?

Granted it'd be hard to justify those either, but not all rape is sadistic, or violent. It's a generalization people have made for some reason.

The most common drugs used in these assaults cause either complete unconsciousness or anterograde amnesia. Plenty of date rapists use lubrication and condoms, and even if they don't, the suffering of the victim is clearly not their intended goal, or they'd have left them conscious.

It's just moronic to assume that every rape MUST be motivated by sadism and power fantasies.

[So date raping someone is a less severe crime because they don't remember it?

That's some quality bullshit right there.]

that depends entirely on your own view of how justice is supposed to work.

As a sometime utilitarian, I think Justice is supposed to punish people with a severity scaled linearly to how much suffering they cause. If nobody actually suffers as a result of your crime, it isn't a very severe crime in my eyes.

[Please tell someone who suffered date rape that they didn't really suffer. Then let me know how that went for you.]

Anecdotes aren't evidence, this argument is not, has never been, and will never be persuasive. I'd also argue that they wouldn't suffer near as much if we didn't treat their vaginas like the arc of the covenant.

The fact of the matter is, if nobody told them, they'd go on with their lives without a worry in the world. They would be completely unharmed by the experience right up until the moment you chose to hurt them by giving them the knowledge of what had happened.

[Forcing someone down and raping or sodomizing them against their will, possibly giving them a disease in the process that could change how they live for the rest of their life, violating a person's privacy and body for simple physical pleasure is just sick.]

So I must ask, again, what about nonviolent rape with lubrication and protection?

[Fell, what is your suggested position on the punishment of someone who has been convicted of drugging women for the purpose of having sex with them while they are unconscious?]

It should directly correspond to the suffering, inconvenience, and loss of security felt by the victim. As a general rule of thumb; more than groping someone, less than sexually assaulting them while they're fully awake and aware.

Lord Woodlouse #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

Homosexuality is a preference which causes far more harm and disunity in society than it NEEDS to. What's more, and this is the important reason of why I think it's logical to phase it out at birth if we can, it ADDS nothing. There is nothing that anyone, by the simple virtue of being homosexual, adds to society, themselves or to others. All it is is sexual preference, the world will NOT become a bland uniform 1984-type scenario by making this decision. That's just ludicrous.

southdakotaboy #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

Let it burn! The state governments will keep order in the streets and a shut down is for nonessential services anyway. Obama and the left went on tv and literally claimed planes would fall from the sky if we passed sequester. Guess what it didn't happen along with all the other doom and gloom that was forcast. The same thing will happen with the shut down. As an added bonus the Republican party held its own in the last shut down. They lost a few House seats (around 6 but kept the majority) and gained Senate seats (2).

So again let it burn and the sow the place with salt and rocks!

Aaron Fox #conspiracy forums.spacebattles.com

Very, very, very pissed off third world nations who practically stole, pirate, and any unsavory thing to get technology used by the first/second world nations with a very intense hatred of the first and second world due to how much they screwed everyone else for essentially two/three centuries. Think of an alliance of nations that are essentially the USSR during WWII, have tendencies of the Nazis, and have much of their populous brainwashed into incapable of compromise or seeing alternatives to 'crushing the oppressors' while carrying out that objective through any means possible set by their leaders.

Crush the opposition to an archology cluster? They carpet nuke that cluster and move on. Bash through that line? They would drown the defenders with bodies and wreckage while using Geneva illegal weapons like napalm with bits of radioactive cobalt in them or directed sonic weapons that liquify flesh in an instant while leaving no prisoners. They understand the concept of morality but chose to ignore it. Many of them are so blinded by propaganda and the 1984's 'good History' teachings that many don't see the First/Second World nations as people anymore, just monsters to be killed. Many who say otherwise are either dead or defectors.

The UNA's near-infinite variable projections indicated a huge 98% possibility that the CON would collapse much like the USSR did when it fell in 1991. Instead the CON start a war that no one could imagine. By the time the tactical nukes were used in late 2110, the UNA high command thought that the CON would then instead fall apart in violence. When the TacNukes were used in the Battle of Mexico City however, all hope for a non-holocaust end of the war died.

Cavalier #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

[Cavalier, a hypothetical. If a couple choses not to have another child because they won't be able to provide for that child, are they somehow being selfish?}

Yeah, because this is really a huge problem in the developed world.

Here's a more likely hypothetical. A live-in couple decide that the woman should get an abortion so they'll be able to buy a big screen plasma and make the payments for a luxury car. Is anything wrong with this?

pcorbett #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

Okay, if you really want me to adopt a principle, I'll take this one:

"Science education should only concern itself with presenting scientific knowledge, scientific methods, the philosophy of science and its criticism."

Great, now ID has a place in science class. Including discussion of all its various flaws both scientifically and philosophically.

[Perhaps I'm missing something here, but how would redefining a science course's curriculum in that way lead to teaching ID? I mean, it's still not a scientific theory.]

I don't see how that objection makes sense unless I assume only science can be taught in science class, which I clearly don't.