❄️ Snowflake shoe0nhead / June Lapine / June La Porta & Armoured Skeptic / Gregory "Greg" Fluhrer - A poor man's Boxxy: rejected by Vaush, disowned by /pol/ for burning coal, sleeps in a dog's bed surrounded by trash, and her ex-boyfriend.

  • Thread starter Thread starter HG 400
  • Start date Start date
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Skeptics: "Oooh, look: There's a few open seats at this lunch table, guys!"

SJWs/Commies: "You can't sit with us!"

These two groups can have each other and just fuck right off from society altogether. Political commentary has become high school to these middle aged weirdos.

And it's basically confirmed that Vaush was friendly with Shoe in the first place because he wanted to fuck her, and not because he actually held any sort of value to her opinions (and, to be fair, who actually does value Shoe's opinions? lol). About a year ago, he was praising Shoe for being "such a large voice for socialism" or some shit, and now that it appears that Shoe is looking for dick elsewhere, he's now disavowing her. It couldn't be more obvious.
 
Mr. Duck said:
Just make an anti-Vaush video already, shoe, your former right wing simps would gladly resub to your channel if you do it.
Click to expand...
She has no spine Shuwu would never make a video on Vaush. In fact, it's more likely that Vaush brings her on his stream to talk about disagreements only for Shuwu to bend over backwards and agree with everything he says.
 
Azer A said:
I think vaush just lost his chance at recruiting her into his sideshow harem
View attachment 2160706
context:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=eo8P3tPyCdI
Click to expand...
This is because the faggot commies are who Juwu has been in closer contact with lately

Her uterus is taking over and smelly pudgy boys do not impress it. But that's all she knows, anywhere

When she comes back to the right she will eventually denounce it as well because again she'll associate with losers her uterus will reject. Time to find a local guido who isn't sperging on the internet all day and night and start making babies quick. Maybe her parents can help her find the perfect Paulie
 
There's something incredibly cringy about Shoe pretending to have some paranoia regarding feds as if her views don't by and large coexist with the establishment's and pretending she'd ever be targeted.
 
highlighter_shitposting said:
You don't need God for morality through
Click to expand...
A personal moral code without God is achievable. A societally agreed upon one without God is much more difficult. People have very different backgrounds and interests, but if you are all Christian or whatever religion, you can generally agree on behavior. The ten commandments, golden rule, etc. The present has the benefit of generations who were raised with the rules, based on some religious code, but once further generations no longer have the ties to those texts and traditions, how do you intellectually justify the agreed upon societal codes based on those religions if people no longer practice? For example, virtues like turn the other cheek? It is not human nature. Why wouldn't you fight back if you don't have the authority figure telling you to do something against personal interest? And if the answer is NAP, who is the authority decides what is hurt? A religious code also unites across generations, gives many a sense of purpose, a cultural identity, creates a communal experience. If there is no God based moral code there is a power struggle for who gets to decide society's moral code because someone most assuredly will.
 
High Tea said:
A personal moral code without God is achievable. A societally agreed upon one without God is much more difficult. People have very different backgrounds and interests, but if you are all Christian or whatever religion, you can generally agree on behavior. The ten commandments, golden rule, etc. The present has the benefit of generations who were raised with the rules, based on some religious code, but once further generations no longer have the ties to those texts and traditions, how do you intellectually justify the agreed upon societal codes based on those religions if people no longer practice? For example, virtues like turn the other cheek? It is not human nature. Why wouldn't you fight back if you don't have the authority figure telling you to do something against personal interest? And if the answer is NAP, who is the authority decides what is hurt? A religious code also unites across generations, gives many a sense of purpose, a cultural identity, creates a communal experience. If there is no God based moral code there is a power struggle for who gets to decide society's moral code because someone most assuredly will.
Click to expand...
Eh, the same thing happens with religion. All that changes is that different religious doctrines battle it out with each other to decide who gets to control the nation. Fuck, England has had several civil wars throughout history to decide if protestants, Catholics or Anglicans get to rule parliament and dictate the kings faith.

There is always a power struggle with or without a state mandated codified religion.
 
StarkRavingMad said:
And it's basically confirmed that Vaush was friendly with Shoe in the first place because he wanted to fuck her, and not because he actually held any sort of value to her opinions (and, to be fair, who actually does value Shoe's opinions? lol). About a year ago, he was praising Shoe for being "such a large voice for socialism" or some shit, and now that it appears that Shoe is looking for dick elsewhere, he's now disavowing her. It couldn't be more obvious.
Click to expand...
what's funny is that he was retweeting june multiple times the day before the kyle video started going around, the next day he was subtweeting kyle, and then two days later he posted the video going after both of them.

like bro you didn't just suddenly change your mind about june in two days out of nowhere. anti-woke has literally always been her thing on some level and you know that. did you make a move on her and get rejected?
 
Last edited:
High Tea said:
A personal moral code without God is achievable. A societally agreed upon one without God is much more difficult. People have very different backgrounds and interests, but if you are all Christian or whatever religion, you can generally agree on behavior. The ten commandments, golden rule, etc. The present has the benefit of generations who were raised with the rules, based on some religious code, but once further generations no longer have the ties to those texts and traditions, how do you intellectually justify the agreed upon societal codes based on those religions if people no longer practice? For example, virtues like turn the other cheek? It is not human nature. Why wouldn't you fight back if you don't have the authority figure telling you to do something against personal interest? And if the answer is NAP, who is the authority decides what is hurt? A religious code also unites across generations, gives many a sense of purpose, a cultural identity, creates a communal experience. If there is no God based moral code there is a power struggle for who gets to decide society's moral code because someone most assuredly will.
Click to expand...
God makes it easier, but it can be done without Him.

What is the authority on what is loving your neighbor? As far as morality system goes, NAP-based one might be more or less objective

Turn the other cheek can eat a dick. Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. Or even better an eye for a tooth

Nationalism can do that as well, of not better. Race or class are an option as well.

That struggle is just as vicious in religous society

Also here's a mandatory Stirner meme

kqwwrm0n66u41.png
 
Without God morality becomes an endless debate and a political football as well.
Because that's how humans be.
We can't even agree on a pandemic response because we turned it into a political issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom