what is going wrong about the word , nice question brah but its a theoretical question very difficult to anwser really, the world its very strange and pathetic sometimes and about robberies ,thieves , car stealers,bike stealer, life stealers general, the world its tragic.
its a hoooleee story.
Topic: What is going wrong in the world? (Read 848 times)
Great explanation from Reddit, thank you for sharing!
The fact that the "too" may be implicit at the end of "black lives matter" is an interesting one, many of us may think that it is implicit. But that organization doesn't use that word, maybe it isn't implicit. Maybe they are trying to get more attention to just black people, in the context of every race needs to fight for itself.
If the statement was "Black lives matter too!" there would be no room for confusion, no misunderstanding, no implicit feeling that they only care about their race.
While there have been some awful, public crimes against black people. There have also been awful, public crimes against white/asian/hispanic/indian/inuit/arabic/[insert race here] people.
A lot of the "victims" this organization believes are examples of the system not demonstrating that black lives matter were criminals - not innocent people, but people who stole, hurt others, cheated, disobeyed the norms of society (norms that are created by everyone in society, every race, every culture.)
It's hard for me to understand an organization that limits its charity to one class of people, let alone one that uses examples where the victims were criminals as their prime examples of the "injustice".
It's unfortunate that this organization doesn't add the "too" at the end of their slogan, because that would remove all doubt AND include everyone (implicitly). It would clearly explain that black people believe they're not getting their fair share...
The fact that the "too" may be implicit at the end of "black lives matter" is an interesting one, many of us may think that it is implicit. But that organization doesn't use that word, maybe it isn't implicit. Maybe they are trying to get more attention to just black people, in the context of every race needs to fight for itself.
If the statement was "Black lives matter too!" there would be no room for confusion, no misunderstanding, no implicit feeling that they only care about their race.
While there have been some awful, public crimes against black people. There have also been awful, public crimes against white/asian/hispanic/indian/inuit/arabic/[insert race here] people.
A lot of the "victims" this organization believes are examples of the system not demonstrating that black lives matter were criminals - not innocent people, but people who stole, hurt others, cheated, disobeyed the norms of society (norms that are created by everyone in society, every race, every culture.)
It's hard for me to understand an organization that limits its charity to one class of people, let alone one that uses examples where the victims were criminals as their prime examples of the "injustice".
It's unfortunate that this organization doesn't add the "too" at the end of their slogan, because that would remove all doubt AND include everyone (implicitly). It would clearly explain that black people believe they're not getting their fair share...
I think the fact that you need the too there to make it clear just shows that you aren't really aware of the facts surrounding the reason for the movement. A lot of people aren't, the press would rather focus on the latest shooting or whatever else will get their ratings up.
http://civilrightsmovement.net/us-arrest-statistics-by-race/
http://www.naacp.org/pages/criminal-justice-fact-sheet
Incarceration Trends in America
-From 1980 to 2008, the number of people incarcerated in America quadrupled-from roughly 500,000 to 2.3 million people
-Today, the US is 5% of the World population and has 25% of world prisoners.
-Combining the number of people in prison and jail with those under parole or probation supervision, 1 in ever y 31 adults, or 3.2 percent of the population is under some form of correctional control
Racial Disparities in Incarceration
-African Americans now constitute nearly 1 million of the total 2.3 million incarcerated population
-African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites
-Together, African American and Hispanics comprised 58% of all prisoners in 2008, even though African Americans and Hispanics make up approximately one quarter of the US population
-According to Unlocking America, if African American and Hispanics were incarcerated at the same rates of whites, today's prison and jail populations would decline by approximately 50%
-One in six black men had been incarcerated as of 2001. If current trends continue, one in three black males born today can expect to spend time in prison during his lifetime
-1 in 100 African American women are in prison
-Nationwide, African-Americans represent 26% of juvenile arrests, 44% of youth who are detained, -46% of the youth who are judicially waived to criminal court, and 58% of the youth admitted to state prisons (Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice).
And African Americans are only 13% of the population. I think the War on Drugs and mandatory sentencing laws are mostly to blame.
So in context, I would say that expecting them to change it to All Lives Matter to include everyone, is unreasonable and misses the point.
Bonus fun fact, there are more African Americans under correctional control (behind bars, parole, probation, etc) today than were enslaved total in the 1800's, ~4 million vs ~3.2 million.
Nice graph there. So instead of trying to fix the problem of, why are blacks committing more crimes than any other race, we are to blame people for upholding the law. Just like school, if a kid now misbehaves, why is the teacher treating that kid unfairly, because surely that must be the case, and not the kids problem at all. People need to start accepting responsibility for their actions and stop looking at other factors.
I am not saying racism doesn't exist, but we need to start looking to why certain things happen, and stop blaming racism.
And African Americans are only 13% of the population. I think the War on Drugs and mandatory sentencing laws are mostly to blame.
So in context, I would say that expecting them to change it to All Lives Matter to include everyone, is unreasonable and misses the point.
Bonus fun fact, there are more African Americans under correctional control (behind bars, parole, probation, etc) today than were enslaved total in the 1800's, ~4 million vs ~3.2 million.
I strongly agree with you on those having being convicted of victimless crime (drug use and trade), however for the rest, I don't express any mercy, what ever the justification you may give them. and I am not sorry, it's public safety. you will note that potus 44 did noting for them...
The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. 
Great explanation from Reddit, thank you for sharing!
The fact that the "too" may be implicit at the end of "black lives matter" is an interesting one, many of us may think that it is implicit. But that organization doesn't use that word, maybe it isn't implicit. Maybe they are trying to get more attention to just black people, in the context of every race needs to fight for itself.
If the statement was "Black lives matter too!" there would be no room for confusion, no misunderstanding, no implicit feeling that they only care about their race.
While there have been some awful, public crimes against black people. There have also been awful, public crimes against white/asian/hispanic/indian/inuit/arabic/[insert race here] people.
A lot of the "victims" this organization believes are examples of the system not demonstrating that black lives matter were criminals - not innocent people, but people who stole, hurt others, cheated, disobeyed the norms of society (norms that are created by everyone in society, every race, every culture.)
It's hard for me to understand an organization that limits its charity to one class of people, let alone one that uses examples where the victims were criminals as their prime examples of the "injustice".
It's unfortunate that this organization doesn't add the "too" at the end of their slogan, because that would remove all doubt AND include everyone (implicitly). It would clearly explain that black people believe they're not getting their fair share...
The fact that the "too" may be implicit at the end of "black lives matter" is an interesting one, many of us may think that it is implicit. But that organization doesn't use that word, maybe it isn't implicit. Maybe they are trying to get more attention to just black people, in the context of every race needs to fight for itself.
If the statement was "Black lives matter too!" there would be no room for confusion, no misunderstanding, no implicit feeling that they only care about their race.
While there have been some awful, public crimes against black people. There have also been awful, public crimes against white/asian/hispanic/indian/inuit/arabic/[insert race here] people.
A lot of the "victims" this organization believes are examples of the system not demonstrating that black lives matter were criminals - not innocent people, but people who stole, hurt others, cheated, disobeyed the norms of society (norms that are created by everyone in society, every race, every culture.)
It's hard for me to understand an organization that limits its charity to one class of people, let alone one that uses examples where the victims were criminals as their prime examples of the "injustice".
It's unfortunate that this organization doesn't add the "too" at the end of their slogan, because that would remove all doubt AND include everyone (implicitly). It would clearly explain that black people believe they're not getting their fair share...
I think the fact that you need the too there to make it clear just shows that you aren't really aware of the facts surrounding the reason for the movement. A lot of people aren't, the press would rather focus on the latest shooting or whatever else will get their ratings up.
http://civilrightsmovement.net/us-arrest-statistics-by-race/
http://www.naacp.org/pages/criminal-justice-fact-sheet
Incarceration Trends in America
-From 1980 to 2008, the number of people incarcerated in America quadrupled-from roughly 500,000 to 2.3 million people
-Today, the US is 5% of the World population and has 25% of world prisoners.
-Combining the number of people in prison and jail with those under parole or probation supervision, 1 in ever y 31 adults, or 3.2 percent of the population is under some form of correctional control
Racial Disparities in Incarceration
-African Americans now constitute nearly 1 million of the total 2.3 million incarcerated population
-African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites
-Together, African American and Hispanics comprised 58% of all prisoners in 2008, even though African Americans and Hispanics make up approximately one quarter of the US population
-According to Unlocking America, if African American and Hispanics were incarcerated at the same rates of whites, today's prison and jail populations would decline by approximately 50%
-One in six black men had been incarcerated as of 2001. If current trends continue, one in three black males born today can expect to spend time in prison during his lifetime
-1 in 100 African American women are in prison
-Nationwide, African-Americans represent 26% of juvenile arrests, 44% of youth who are detained, -46% of the youth who are judicially waived to criminal court, and 58% of the youth admitted to state prisons (Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice).
And African Americans are only 13% of the population. I think the War on Drugs and mandatory sentencing laws are mostly to blame.
So in context, I would say that expecting them to change it to All Lives Matter to include everyone, is unreasonable and misses the point.
Bonus fun fact, there are more African Americans under correctional control (behind bars, parole, probation, etc) today than were enslaved total in the 1800's, ~4 million vs ~3.2 million.
dear WhatTheGox,
(nice nickname) I really agree with your theory. I am sure there is some consciousness harvesting going on. peace and love don't produce the same "energy" level in the "ether" as war and hate.
dear vero,
I don't agree with you, there have been great People everywhere.
dear H1N1 and Possum577,
thank you for the link. I strongly with the statement that the too would have been very appropriate. most forget that no cops like to kill. however when people don't behave appropriately, show your hands, don't be aggressive, wait for the protocol to be applied, walk free (or arrested) alive, there will be repercussions. Cops wanna go home, alive, why take the risks?
Now about the link from reddit (impossible to follow a conversation there), I am deeply shocked by the example given. Fundamentally I will not starve my Donkey for your children. My Donkey maybe fat now, but you have no idea on which journey he is going to be in a few day. As such there is no "fair share", you fend for yourselves. and it's quite relevant that it's about food, what the problem ebt (foodstamps), obamacare, obamaphone, what else do they want? a giant mcmansion with bimbo dancing around their swimming pool provided with the money of other people? please stop kidding me, and learn to make money.
remember my Donkey or your child, it ain't a trade off. it's a fact of life.
(nice nickname) I really agree with your theory. I am sure there is some consciousness harvesting going on. peace and love don't produce the same "energy" level in the "ether" as war and hate.
dear vero,
I don't agree with you, there have been great People everywhere.
dear H1N1 and Possum577,
thank you for the link. I strongly with the statement that the too would have been very appropriate. most forget that no cops like to kill. however when people don't behave appropriately, show your hands, don't be aggressive, wait for the protocol to be applied, walk free (or arrested) alive, there will be repercussions. Cops wanna go home, alive, why take the risks?
Now about the link from reddit (impossible to follow a conversation there), I am deeply shocked by the example given. Fundamentally I will not starve my Donkey for your children. My Donkey maybe fat now, but you have no idea on which journey he is going to be in a few day. As such there is no "fair share", you fend for yourselves. and it's quite relevant that it's about food, what the problem ebt (foodstamps), obamacare, obamaphone, what else do they want? a giant mcmansion with bimbo dancing around their swimming pool provided with the money of other people? please stop kidding me, and learn to make money.
remember my Donkey or your child, it ain't a trade off. it's a fact of life.
For example, Black lives matter has been breaking laws left and right, shutting down highways, events, and they are being praised by the media. This is absolutely sick, They should be arrested when they break the law not praised for it.
Not to mention the irony of their purpose. They're an organization that purports to fight racism by preaching that one race of people's lives are more important than others. I realize they don't say "Black Lives Matter MORE" but saying that "BLACK lives matter" any excluding all other races is inherently racist. If they really cared about all races and ending racism they wouldn't limit their love to just one race.
I think the point they are trying to make is that blacks are disproportionately targetted.
Someone else on reddit said it best, I'll just quote it here.
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3du1qm/eli5_why_is_it_so_controversial_when_someone_says/
Quote
Imagine that you’re sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don’t get any. So you say “I should get my fair share.” And as a direct response to this, your dad corrects you, saying, “everyone should get their fair share.” Now, that’s a wonderful sentiment — indeed, everyone should, and that was kinda your point in the first place: that you should be a part of everyone, and you should get your fair share also. However, dad’s smart-ass comment just dismissed you and didn’t solve the problem that you still haven’t gotten any!
The problem is that the statement “I should get my fair share” had an implicit “too” at the end: “I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else.” But your dad’s response treated your statement as though you meant “only I should get my fair share”, which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that “everyone should get their fair share,” while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out.
That’s the situation of the “black lives matter” movement. Culture, laws, the arts, religion, and everyone else repeatedly suggest that all lives should matter. Clearly, that message already abounds in our society.
The problem is that, in practice, the world doesn’t work that way. You see the film Nightcrawler? You know the part where Renee Russo tells Jake Gyllenhal that she doesn’t want footage of a black or latino person dying, she wants news stories about affluent white people being killed? That’s not made up out of whole cloth — there is a news bias toward stories that the majority of the audience (who are white) can identify with. So when a young black man gets killed (prior to the recent police shootings), it’s generally not considered “news”, while a middle-aged white woman being killed is treated as news. And to a large degree, that is accurate — young black men are killed in significantly disproportionate numbers, which is why we don’t treat it as anything new. But the result is that, societally, we don’t pay as much attention to certain people’s deaths as we do to others. So, currently, we don’t treat all lives as though they matter equally.
Just like asking dad for your fair share, the phrase “black lives matter” also has an implicit “too” at the end: it’s saying that black lives should also matter. But responding to this by saying “all lives matter” is willfully going back to ignoring the problem. It’s a way of dismissing the statement by falsely suggesting that it means “only black lives matter,” when that is obviously not the case. And so saying “all lives matter” as a direct response to “black lives matter” is essentially saying that we should just go back to ignoring the problem.
The problem is that the statement “I should get my fair share” had an implicit “too” at the end: “I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else.” But your dad’s response treated your statement as though you meant “only I should get my fair share”, which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that “everyone should get their fair share,” while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out.
That’s the situation of the “black lives matter” movement. Culture, laws, the arts, religion, and everyone else repeatedly suggest that all lives should matter. Clearly, that message already abounds in our society.
The problem is that, in practice, the world doesn’t work that way. You see the film Nightcrawler? You know the part where Renee Russo tells Jake Gyllenhal that she doesn’t want footage of a black or latino person dying, she wants news stories about affluent white people being killed? That’s not made up out of whole cloth — there is a news bias toward stories that the majority of the audience (who are white) can identify with. So when a young black man gets killed (prior to the recent police shootings), it’s generally not considered “news”, while a middle-aged white woman being killed is treated as news. And to a large degree, that is accurate — young black men are killed in significantly disproportionate numbers, which is why we don’t treat it as anything new. But the result is that, societally, we don’t pay as much attention to certain people’s deaths as we do to others. So, currently, we don’t treat all lives as though they matter equally.
Just like asking dad for your fair share, the phrase “black lives matter” also has an implicit “too” at the end: it’s saying that black lives should also matter. But responding to this by saying “all lives matter” is willfully going back to ignoring the problem. It’s a way of dismissing the statement by falsely suggesting that it means “only black lives matter,” when that is obviously not the case. And so saying “all lives matter” as a direct response to “black lives matter” is essentially saying that we should just go back to ignoring the problem.
Great explanation from Reddit, thank you for sharing!
The fact that the "too" may be implicit at the end of "black lives matter" is an interesting one, many of us may think that it is implicit. But that organization doesn't use that word, maybe it isn't implicit. Maybe they are trying to get more attention to just black people, in the context of every race needs to fight for itself.
If the statement was "Black lives matter too!" there would be no room for confusion, no misunderstanding, no implicit feeling that they only care about their race.
While there have been some awful, public crimes against black people. There have also been awful, public crimes against white/asian/hispanic/indian/inuit/arabic/[insert race here] people.
A lot of the "victims" this organization believes are examples of the system not demonstrating that black lives matter were criminals - not innocent people, but people who stole, hurt others, cheated, disobeyed the norms of society (norms that are created by everyone in society, every race, every culture.)
It's hard for me to understand an organization that limits its charity to one class of people, let alone one that uses examples where the victims were criminals as their prime examples of the "injustice".
It's unfortunate that this organization doesn't add the "too" at the end of their slogan, because that would remove all doubt AND include everyone (implicitly). It would clearly explain that black people believe they're not getting their fair share...
For example, Black lives matter has been breaking laws left and right, shutting down highways, events, and they are being praised by the media. This is absolutely sick, They should be arrested when they break the law not praised for it.
Not to mention the irony of their purpose. They're an organization that purports to fight racism by preaching that one race of people's lives are more important than others. I realize they don't say "Black Lives Matter MORE" but saying that "BLACK lives matter" any excluding all other races is inherently racist. If they really cared about all races and ending racism they wouldn't limit their love to just one race.
I think the point they are trying to make is that blacks are disproportionately targetted.
Someone else on reddit said it best, I'll just quote it here.
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3du1qm/eli5_why_is_it_so_controversial_when_someone_says/
Quote
Imagine that you’re sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don’t get any. So you say “I should get my fair share.” And as a direct response to this, your dad corrects you, saying, “everyone should get their fair share.” Now, that’s a wonderful sentiment — indeed, everyone should, and that was kinda your point in the first place: that you should be a part of everyone, and you should get your fair share also. However, dad’s smart-ass comment just dismissed you and didn’t solve the problem that you still haven’t gotten any!
The problem is that the statement “I should get my fair share” had an implicit “too” at the end: “I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else.” But your dad’s response treated your statement as though you meant “only I should get my fair share”, which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that “everyone should get their fair share,” while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out.
That’s the situation of the “black lives matter” movement. Culture, laws, the arts, religion, and everyone else repeatedly suggest that all lives should matter. Clearly, that message already abounds in our society.
The problem is that, in practice, the world doesn’t work that way. You see the film Nightcrawler? You know the part where Renee Russo tells Jake Gyllenhal that she doesn’t want footage of a black or latino person dying, she wants news stories about affluent white people being killed? That’s not made up out of whole cloth — there is a news bias toward stories that the majority of the audience (who are white) can identify with. So when a young black man gets killed (prior to the recent police shootings), it’s generally not considered “news”, while a middle-aged white woman being killed is treated as news. And to a large degree, that is accurate — young black men are killed in significantly disproportionate numbers, which is why we don’t treat it as anything new. But the result is that, societally, we don’t pay as much attention to certain people’s deaths as we do to others. So, currently, we don’t treat all lives as though they matter equally.
Just like asking dad for your fair share, the phrase “black lives matter” also has an implicit “too” at the end: it’s saying that black lives should also matter. But responding to this by saying “all lives matter” is willfully going back to ignoring the problem. It’s a way of dismissing the statement by falsely suggesting that it means “only black lives matter,” when that is obviously not the case. And so saying “all lives matter” as a direct response to “black lives matter” is essentially saying that we should just go back to ignoring the problem.
The problem is that the statement “I should get my fair share” had an implicit “too” at the end: “I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else.” But your dad’s response treated your statement as though you meant “only I should get my fair share”, which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that “everyone should get their fair share,” while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out.
That’s the situation of the “black lives matter” movement. Culture, laws, the arts, religion, and everyone else repeatedly suggest that all lives should matter. Clearly, that message already abounds in our society.
The problem is that, in practice, the world doesn’t work that way. You see the film Nightcrawler? You know the part where Renee Russo tells Jake Gyllenhal that she doesn’t want footage of a black or latino person dying, she wants news stories about affluent white people being killed? That’s not made up out of whole cloth — there is a news bias toward stories that the majority of the audience (who are white) can identify with. So when a young black man gets killed (prior to the recent police shootings), it’s generally not considered “news”, while a middle-aged white woman being killed is treated as news. And to a large degree, that is accurate — young black men are killed in significantly disproportionate numbers, which is why we don’t treat it as anything new. But the result is that, societally, we don’t pay as much attention to certain people’s deaths as we do to others. So, currently, we don’t treat all lives as though they matter equally.
Just like asking dad for your fair share, the phrase “black lives matter” also has an implicit “too” at the end: it’s saying that black lives should also matter. But responding to this by saying “all lives matter” is willfully going back to ignoring the problem. It’s a way of dismissing the statement by falsely suggesting that it means “only black lives matter,” when that is obviously not the case. And so saying “all lives matter” as a direct response to “black lives matter” is essentially saying that we should just go back to ignoring the problem.
For example, Black lives matter has been breaking laws left and right, shutting down highways, events, and they are being praised by the media. This is absolutely sick, They should be arrested when they break the law not praised for it.
Not to mention the irony of their purpose. They're an organization that purports to fight racism by preaching that one race of people's lives are more important than others. I realize they don't say "Black Lives Matter MORE" but saying that "BLACK lives matter" any excluding all other races is inherently racist. If they really cared about all races and ending racism they wouldn't limit their love to just one race.
The only difference is now we have mass media and we don't try to hide it like we did in the fifties. Humans almost thrive on knowing what is wrong now.
The media is a big part of why it feels worse now than in years past. The media not only lets us know it's happening but they also get to put a spin or point of view on the story. Too often that spin becomes more and more sensational or one sided because ordinary news doesn't attract people to the TV station or eyeballs to the website.
When we all start showing universal respect for each other, as neighbors, less judgement, more listening, more effort understanding - we will see the world improve.
has been going wrong since the beginning of time. It's never been right. The only difference is now we have mass media and we don't try to hide it like we did in the fifties. Humans almost thrive on knowing what is wrong now.
The problem is OP that people/groups/the herd have great power over others and can get you to do things you may or may not agree with. You are battling for liberty of yourself and others. We are in one giant super farm and the resource being farmed is the human consciousness which is a very valuable asset.
Dear Possum577,
I strongly agree with you. I humbly think that one of the big problem is brain washing. since life become easier for most human the ability and use of thinking has go down dramatically... before when some one told a group of hunter to jump from a cliff because there were mammoths down the hole, they knew that it was a trap (and those too stupid died)
today, those stupid people (that have the capacity to be cog, aka wheels in a machine) don't have the capacity to think individually. they follow the herd (german, austrians etc with the nazis are like the drug prohibitionists).
It's a big NO NO for a species genociding their native flora to reach past a certain developpement stage. right now humans are like a cancer that is managed, aka it's grow is permited in the hope that it can self heal by returning to reason, logic, kindness, harmony, love.
However if not reach the Avatar scenario will NEVER happen, here it's the natural growth path of human... but once the Interstellar Wall is touched, the point of no return, the reversal may be instantaneous.
savages barbarians stay behind the wall.
the space federation will not commit suicide because some bipeds believe to be the chosen species of god ... L.o.L.
would you have lead jews to the owens or would you have hiden them during the 3 reich? it's the same story with the genocide of the plants used for drugs (but not alcohol, tobacco, and coffee), and the slow, silent genocids on their human users.
FREE WILL _ CONSENT must be the UNDERLYING FOUNDATION OF FREE PEOPLE.
most law that I see are made to enslave people, safe guard the interrest of the slave master.
there are 2 types of slave in the plantations, those that serve, those that Ryse (every take off must be planned).
I strongly agree with your interpretation of this social engineered movement, it's part of the destruction of the US C and BoR... it's a scientifically marginal (slow moving) destruction.
IN GOD WE TRUST.
I strongly agree with you. I humbly think that one of the big problem is brain washing. since life become easier for most human the ability and use of thinking has go down dramatically... before when some one told a group of hunter to jump from a cliff because there were mammoths down the hole, they knew that it was a trap (and those too stupid died)
today, those stupid people (that have the capacity to be cog, aka wheels in a machine) don't have the capacity to think individually. they follow the herd (german, austrians etc with the nazis are like the drug prohibitionists).
It's a big NO NO for a species genociding their native flora to reach past a certain developpement stage. right now humans are like a cancer that is managed, aka it's grow is permited in the hope that it can self heal by returning to reason, logic, kindness, harmony, love.
However if not reach the Avatar scenario will NEVER happen, here it's the natural growth path of human... but once the Interstellar Wall is touched, the point of no return, the reversal may be instantaneous.
savages barbarians stay behind the wall.
the space federation will not commit suicide because some bipeds believe to be the chosen species of god ... L.o.L.
Laws are made usually for a reason. Although I don't agree with some of the laws, they are there and I try to follow them.
What bothers me most is that the minority of the people(I am not speaking of race, religion, sex) speak their mind and everyone follows along and only says stuff in side comments. For example, Black lives matter has been breaking laws left and right, shutting down highways, events, and they are being praised by the media. This is absolutely sick, They should be arrested when they break the law not praised for it.
What bothers me most is that the minority of the people(I am not speaking of race, religion, sex) speak their mind and everyone follows along and only says stuff in side comments. For example, Black lives matter has been breaking laws left and right, shutting down highways, events, and they are being praised by the media. This is absolutely sick, They should be arrested when they break the law not praised for it.
would you have lead jews to the owens or would you have hiden them during the 3 reich? it's the same story with the genocide of the plants used for drugs (but not alcohol, tobacco, and coffee), and the slow, silent genocids on their human users.
FREE WILL _ CONSENT must be the UNDERLYING FOUNDATION OF FREE PEOPLE.
most law that I see are made to enslave people, safe guard the interrest of the slave master.
there are 2 types of slave in the plantations, those that serve, those that Ryse (every take off must be planned).
I strongly agree with your interpretation of this social engineered movement, it's part of the destruction of the US C and BoR... it's a scientifically marginal (slow moving) destruction.
IN GOD WE TRUST.
Laws are made usually for a reason. Although I don't agree with some of the laws, they are there and I try to follow them.
What bothers me most is that the minority of the people(I am not speaking of race, religion, sex) speak their mind and everyone follows along and only says stuff in side comments. For example, Black lives matter has been breaking laws left and right, shutting down highways, events, and they are being praised by the media. This is absolutely sick, They should be arrested when they break the law not praised for it.
What bothers me most is that the minority of the people(I am not speaking of race, religion, sex) speak their mind and everyone follows along and only says stuff in side comments. For example, Black lives matter has been breaking laws left and right, shutting down highways, events, and they are being praised by the media. This is absolutely sick, They should be arrested when they break the law not praised for it.
First, not all of these causes are met or fought with violence.
Second, a lot of the frustration people have is due to the money from governments that may be spend on these causes that people object to so deeply (e.g., abortion clinics).
I'm with you on most of this. We should do less to restrict people's individual freedoms. However I also feel the government tax dollars should support less organizations as well. Let the people that are avid pro-choicers (in the US) fund the abortion clinics. Let the people who go to church fund their churches.
Using violence is wrong, obviously. However then some say if we give up our guns the Government will force us into submission OR guns protect. But then some shooting happens and where were the "guns to protect"? No where...they don't stop the tragedies from happening.
This world will get no better until we learn not to hate each other and we learn not to kill each other. Only then will we be able to excel into the realm of interstellar achievements.
Second, a lot of the frustration people have is due to the money from governments that may be spend on these causes that people object to so deeply (e.g., abortion clinics).
I'm with you on most of this. We should do less to restrict people's individual freedoms. However I also feel the government tax dollars should support less organizations as well. Let the people that are avid pro-choicers (in the US) fund the abortion clinics. Let the people who go to church fund their churches.
Using violence is wrong, obviously. However then some say if we give up our guns the Government will force us into submission OR guns protect. But then some shooting happens and where were the "guns to protect"? No where...they don't stop the tragedies from happening.
This world will get no better until we learn not to hate each other and we learn not to kill each other. Only then will we be able to excel into the realm of interstellar achievements.
there is something going fundamentally going wrong bigger than the fiat debt consequences... in it self what ever the way of an economic system work, it's just a way to keep score of trade.
I would like to go one step beyond it.
So for me one of the big problem affecting me the most is intolerant people using violence to impose their way of life/thinking/believing on me.
the LGBT movement is the perfect example of what is going wrong in this world. what does it change to me how anyone want to live his/her/it life... I do care, but it doesn't affect me in anyway, shape or form. what does it change if 2 girls, 2 men, 2 what ever want... key word want without crossing the unwant of anyone?
for me this is the key problem. for example I want to smoke some weed, who do I hurt? please tell me? how does I affect your life?
the one argument is that I will not be the good slave that will help carry big block to build a pyramid. but back to my lgbt story if people want to carry big block to build your pyramid they are free. I can complain that you are hurting the view by building your collective pyramid... however by smoking weed, I wouldn't hurt the landscape, nor the view, nor you, nor anyone but me (SMOKING ANYTHING BUT VAPOR OF WATER is not HEALTHY).
but however when a man (called cop) will come to me, and put me in jail, because I do something that didn't hurt him or anyone, he is to me a demon.
you can take abortion (it's not your baby, you will not carry it), you can take what ever... if you don't think in want/unwant hurt/unhurt you are already demoniac.
you can hide yourself behind what ever you want, it's still demoniac.
The evil is kinder than most demons.
maybe some input from someone?
once that said it lead to me that the only group of people that did the PEACE AND LOVE were AMERICANS, that killing innocent people on a foreign land isn't something that I want to impose on anyone... (if those others attack the us it's another story).
anyway tragic day.
I would like to go one step beyond it.
So for me one of the big problem affecting me the most is intolerant people using violence to impose their way of life/thinking/believing on me.
the LGBT movement is the perfect example of what is going wrong in this world. what does it change to me how anyone want to live his/her/it life... I do care, but it doesn't affect me in anyway, shape or form. what does it change if 2 girls, 2 men, 2 what ever want... key word want without crossing the unwant of anyone?
for me this is the key problem. for example I want to smoke some weed, who do I hurt? please tell me? how does I affect your life?
the one argument is that I will not be the good slave that will help carry big block to build a pyramid. but back to my lgbt story if people want to carry big block to build your pyramid they are free. I can complain that you are hurting the view by building your collective pyramid... however by smoking weed, I wouldn't hurt the landscape, nor the view, nor you, nor anyone but me (SMOKING ANYTHING BUT VAPOR OF WATER is not HEALTHY).
but however when a man (called cop) will come to me, and put me in jail, because I do something that didn't hurt him or anyone, he is to me a demon.
you can take abortion (it's not your baby, you will not carry it), you can take what ever... if you don't think in want/unwant hurt/unhurt you are already demoniac.
you can hide yourself behind what ever you want, it's still demoniac.
The evil is kinder than most demons.
maybe some input from someone?
once that said it lead to me that the only group of people that did the PEACE AND LOVE were AMERICANS, that killing innocent people on a foreign land isn't something that I want to impose on anyone... (if those others attack the us it's another story).
anyway tragic day.
Jump to: