LOL Half Indian looksmax user considering paying 50k for model semen in order to have good looking daughters

[hopelessAspieNEET]

 

[Arcadicel]

Aren't they typically 100k+ ?

 

[rottingkyre]

Would be a good idea if not for the "daughters" part

 

[Robtical]

Would be a good idea if not for the "daughters" part

Imagine getting a stacy daughter and raising her for 18 years just to be banged by chads.

 

[hopelessAspieNEET]

Imagine getting a stacy daughter and raising her for 18 years just to be banged by chads.

More like 12

 

[Robtical]

More like 12

Having a daughter these days is the ultimate cuck. Ask Jordan Peterson

 

[hopelessAspieNEET]

Having a daughter these days is the ultimate cuck. Ask Jordan Peterson

This was common knowledge at the biblical times. Only until recently people started putting the female onto a pedestal. When a man would rape a woman the only thing he had to do is pay her father and marry the woman. Ovulating women weren't allowed to be touched and they were even prohibited from touching beds and clothing. Prostitutes were stoned and women were forced into marriage, no such thing as a "boyfriend" back then.

 

[KARENIN]

This was common knowledge at the biblical times. Only until recently people started putting the female onto a pedestal. When a man would rape a woman the only thing he had to do is pay her father and marry the woman. Ovulating women weren't allowed to be touched and they were even prohibited from touching beds and clothing. Prostitutes were stoned and women were forced into marriage, no such thing as a "boyfriend" back then.

>biblical
>(((Old Testament)))
If that's how Juden Semitic vermin treat their women it's no wonder Jewish yentas would cuck their men and lust after Aryan cock or even practice feminism, of which they invented both the second and third "wave".

In contrast, the ancient Germanics built stable, flourishing societies where women made themselves useful to their men and race, without any biblical ""morality"". From

Tacitus' Germania

:

Close by them, too, are their nearest and dearest, so that they can hear the shrieks of their womenfolk and the wailing of their children. These are the witnesses whom each man reverences most highly, whose praise he most desires. It is to their mothers and wives that they go to have their wounds treated, and the women are not afraid to count and compare the gashes. They also carry supplies of food to the combatants and encourage them.


It stands on record that armies already wavering and on the point of collapse have been rallied by the women, pleading heroically with their men, thrusting forward their bared bosoms, and making them realize the imminent prospect of enslavement - a fate which the Germans fear more desperately for their women than for themselves. Indeed, you can secure a surer hold on these nations if you compel them to include among a consignment of hostages some girls of noble family. More than this, they believe that there resides in women an element of holiness and a gift of prophecy; and so they do not scorn to ask their advice, or lightly disregard their replies. In the reign of the emperor Vespasian we saw Veleda long honoured by many Germans as a divinity; and even earlier they showed a similar reverence for Aurinia and a number of others - a reverence untainted by servile flattery or any presence of turning women into goddesses.​

Their marriage code, however, is strict, and no feature of their morality deserves higher praise. They are almost unique among barbarians in being content with one wife apiece - all of them, that is, except a very few who take more than one wife not to satisfy their desires but because their exalted rank brings them many pressing offers of matrimonial alliances. The dowry is brought by husband to wife, not by wife to husband. Parents and kinsmen attend and approve the gifts - not gifts chosen to please a woman's fancy or gaily deck a young bride, but oxen, a horse with its bridle, or a shield, spear, and sword. In consideration of such gifts a man gets his wife, and she in her turn brings a present of arms to her husband. This interchange of gifts typifies for them the most sacred bond of union, sanctified by mystic rites under the favour of the presiding deities of wedlock. The woman must not think that she is excluded from aspirations to manly virtues or exempt from the hazards of warfare. That is why she is reminded, in the very ceremonies which bless her marriage at its outset, that she enters her husband's home to be the partner of his toils and perils, that both in peace and in war she is to share his sufferings and adventures. That is the meaning of the team of oxen, the horse ready for its rider, and the gift of arms. On these terms she must live her life and bear her children. She is receiving something that she must hand over intact and undepreciated to her children, something for her sons' wives to receive in their turn and pass on to her grandchildren.


By such means is the virtue of their women protected, and they live uncorrupted by the temptations of public shows or the excitements of banquets. Clandestine loveletters are unknown to men and women alike. Adultery is extremely rare, considering the size of the population. A guilty wife is summarily punished by her husband. He cuts off her hair, strips her naked, and in the presence of kinsmen turns her out of his house and flogs her all through the village. They have in tact no mercy on a wife who prostitutes her chastity. Neither beauty, youth, nor wealth can find her another husband. No one in Germany finds vice amusing, or calls it 'up-to-date' to seduce and be seduced. Even better is the practice of those states in which only virgins may marry, so that a woman who has once been a bride has finished with all such hopes and aspirations. She takes one husband, just as she has one body and one life. Her thoughts must not stray beyond him or her desires survive him. And even that husband she must love not for himself, but as an embodiment of the married state. To restrict the number of children, or to kill any of those born after the heir, is considered wicked. Good morality is more effective in Germany than good laws are elsewhere.

In every home the children go naked and dirty, and develop that strength of limb and tall stature which excite our admiration. Every mother feeds her child at the breast and does not depute the task to maids or nurses. The young master is not distinguished from the slave by any pampering in his upbringing. They live together among the same flocks and on the same earthen floor, until maturity sets apart the free and the spirit of velour claims them as her own. The young men are slow to mate, and thus they reach manhood with vigour unimpaired. The girls, too, are not hurried into marriage. As old and full-grown as the men, they match their mates in age and strength, and the children inherit the robustness of their parents. The sons of sisters are as highly honoured by their uncles as by their own fathers. Some tribes even consider the former tie the closer and more sacred of the two, and in demanding hostages prefer nephews to sons, thinking that this gives them a firmer grip on men's hearts and a wider hold on the family. However, a man's heirs and successors are his own children, and there is no such thing as a will. When there is no issue, the first in order of succession are brothers, and then uncles, first on the father's, then on the mother's side. The more relatives and connections by marriage a man has, the greater authority he commands in old age. There is nothing to be gained by childlessness in Germany.​

 

[hopelessAspieNEET]

>biblical
>(((Old Testament)))
If that's how Juden Semitic vermin treat their women it's no wonder Jewish yentas would cuck their men and lust after Aryan cock or even practice feminism, of which they invented both the second and third "wave".

In contrast, the ancient Germanics built stable, flourishing societies where women made themselves useful to their men and race, without any biblical ""morality"". From

Tacitus' Germania

:

The Israelites weren't the people that claim to "Jews" now anyways. You believe fiction that's made out to be real like all of history is. When women are given the opportunity they will fuck chads, cheat, gaslight and spend their life traveling to degenerate shitholes to be rammed by multiple men only to then settle for a betabux. Women need to be treated like children and disciplined to have a working society with monogamous relationships, this shit should be obvious. @GeckoBus

 

[KARENIN]

You believe fiction that's made out to be real like all of history is.

>all of history is fiction made out to be real
>except muh bible
Ok Cuckstiancel

 

[anon1822fourthacc]

Hmm, I smell a potential scam.

 

[hopelessAspieNEET]

>all of history is fiction made out to be real
>except muh bible
Ok Cuckstiancel

If you read other religious texts or compare the quality of supposed history writings you will realize that it doesn't even come anywhere close to the quality of the biblical canon. Which is a text that is fully consistent, without hypocrisy and writing that repeatedly predicted what would happen perfectly and with things of which the existence of can easily be confirmed. No decieving fuck conspiring against humanity would be able to write a piece anything close to that. Every other religious text written by them is full of contradictions and hypocrisy.

 

[GeckoBus]

>all of history is fiction made out to be real
>except muh bible
Ok Cuckstiancel

bro most of your sources on pagan culture were preserved by christians

If you read other religious texts or compare the quality of supposed history writings you will realize that it doesn't even come anywhere close to the quality of the biblical canon. Which is a text that is fully consistent, without hypocrisy and writing that repeatedly predicted what would happen perfectly and with things of which the existence of can easily be confirmed. No decieving fuck conspiring against humanity would be able to write a piece anything close to that. Every other religious text written by them is full of contradictions and hypocrisy.

PSSHHT DONT TELL HIM THE BIBLE IS LIKE 99% ACCURATE HISTORICALLY AND THEY EVEN FOUND THE NIGGAS GRAE THAT JUDGED JESUS IN THE GOSPELS IN LIKE 1990 LOL

Caiaphas ossuary - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

dont let him know the bible is one of the most reliable ancient documents ever.
Dont tell him we have an insane amount of preserved original sources, more than for any other historical document.
Dont tell him about the dead sea scrolls which were written 100s of years before Jesus yet show zero alteration to the old testament copies from 1000s of years later.



And besides that, I dont think you can root morality outside an absolute, personal God.

Let's take "might is right" for instance.
A lot of pagans think this is some magic want they can swing around.

You just have to ask why might is right, at which point you just get a bunch of logical fallacies in return
1. is/ought fallacy - "omg nature tells us might is right" - nothing about nature tells us any moral laws whatsoever. Nothing about seeing a bear eat a deer gives us a law that says "superior power justifies any action in any case"

2. appeal to nature fallacy - similar shit, "is natural bro" - fucking each other in the ass is also natural, I know because my dad used to raise rabbits and they do it all the time

3. the more philosophical issue
a)"there is no morality, only might is right" - ok but "might is right" is a moral law. And we already established that you can't get an ought from an is. You cant get moral laws from observations. So "might is right" is not natural but also man made.
b) so how do you know might is right? Its just a faith based assumption you make.
At this point it just defaults to relativism and then absurdity.

Because if you can't explain why you are right outside of saying you believe you are, then you have to explain why having faith is a valid justification. How do you know that having faith in your own convictions is true and valid?
It becomes circular reasoning.
"I know I am right, because I have faith that I am right and I know that having faith is justified because I believe that I am right."

And then it becomes absurd because the next and final step is to ask how you can know that you have faith and that your faith in faith is true and not man made (by you). You can't. So basically, you cant know anyhting, not even that you can know things. The possibility of knowledge itself is destroyed.

The only way out of this is to assume an absolute moral standard outside yourself as a starting position. Any other starting position defaults to absurdity.

 

[KARENIN]

If you read other religious texts or compare the quality of supposed history writings you will realize that it doesn't even come anywhere close to the quality of the biblical canon. Which is a text that is fully consistent, without hypocrisy and writing that repeatedly predicted what would happen perfectly and with things of which the existence of can easily be confirmed.

Your anthology of Jewish stories didn't predict anything that could be verified and contains stories that aren't physically possible, e.g. man demolishes buildings with a push, another man parting the sea, and some cunt getting pregnant while being a ""virgin"".

 

[KARENIN]

how you can know that you have faith and that your faith in faith is true and not man made (by you). You can't. The only way out of this is to assume an absolute moral standard outside yourself as a starting position. Any other starting position defaults to absurdity

Morality is man-made though, it doesn't exist for non-human animals so what's your point?

fucking each other in the ass is also natural, I know because my dad used to raise rabbits and they do it all the time

You seem weirdly obsessed with fucking other guys in the ass. I can see why @WeebHunter3000 got you banned from .is

 

[KARENIN]

bro most of your sources on pagan culture were preserved by christians

Again, what's your fucking point? Many pagan manuscripts were lost in the first place because of wanton destruction of public property by Cuckstians during the late Roman Empire. Practically all of Europe was nominally Christian from Charlemagne's reign until the Enlightenment, so any manuscript surviving until then would naturally have been in the ownership of a nominally Christian wealthy individual or institution.

The Dead Sea Scrolls survived due to being sealed in a jar and left undisturbed in a shithole for millennia, a far more effective way to preserve documents than any Cuckstian effort.

 

[GeckoBus]

Morality is man-made though, it doesn't exist for non-human animals so what's your point?

You seem weirdly obsessed with fucking other guys in the ass. I can see why @WeebHunter3000 got you banned from .is

if morality doesn exist, why is christianity wrong?
why is the destruction of pagans and their documents wrong?

Again, what's your fucking point? Many pagan manuscripts were lost in the first place because of wanton destruction of public property by Cuckstians during the late Roman Empire. Practically all of Europe was nominally Christian from Charlemagne's reign until the Enlightenment, so any manuscript surviving until then would naturally have been in the ownership of a nominally Christian wealthy individual or institution.

The Dead Sea Scrolls survived due to being sealed in a jar and left undisturbed in a shithole for millennia, a far more effective way to preserve documents than any Cuckstian effort.

again, why does any of this matter if morality doesnt exist?

if morality doesnt exist and its all just man made
1. shitholes dont exist because theres no standard for why anyhting is good or bad
2. persecuting pagans isnt good or bad
3. christianity isnt good or bad
4. making jokes about homosexuality, being homosexual or being anti-homosexual = all the same

your entire position is retarded.
Morals dont exist, so how are you arguing for anything? Nothing matters anyway.

 

[KARENIN]

if morality doesn exist, why is christianity wrong?
why is the destruction of pagans and their documents wrong?
your entire position is retarded.
Morals dont exist, so how are you arguing for anything? Nothing matters anyway.

I specified that morality doesn't exist for non-human animals, retard. Morals are guidelines developed by humans for communal survival in a hostile, volatile external environment and are judged by their effects. To use your favourite example, if fucking another guy in the ass significantly improved intelligence/immunity/muscle mass etc. instead of spreading disease and death, then it would be regarded as moral or harmless and every surviving human society would be pro-buttfucking.
Your position that morality can't exist without the Cuckstian God is even more retarded because it presupposes the Cuckstian worldview is true AND defines morality in exclusively Cuckstian terms as a universally applicable set of rules to be obeyed unconditionally.
>Nothing matters anyway
A statement endorsed by the Bible. "Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1:2-11 ESV)

 

[GeckoBus]

I specified that morality doesn't exist for non-human animals, retard. Morals are guidelines developed by humans for communal survival in a hostile, volatile external environment and are judged by their effects. To use your favourite example, if fucking another guy in the ass significantly improved intelligence/immunity/muscle mass etc. instead of spreading disease and death, then it would be regarded as moral or harmless and every surviving human society would be pro-buttfucking.
Your position that morality can't exist without the Cuckstian God is even more retarded because it presupposes the Cuckstian worldview is true AND defines morality in exclusively Cuckstian terms as a universally applicable set of rules.
>Nothing matters anyway
A statement endorsed by the Bible. "Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1:2-11 ESV)

bro

Morals are guidelines developed by humans for communal survival in a hostile, volatile external environment and are judged by their effects.

literally logical fallacy maxxing. Appealing to group consensus is a logical fallacy and no ta valid justification
so morals are just based on human convention and therefore relative?
again, relative morality = no morality. Your position is retarded.

Also, you cant even justify why humans are special in your worldview.
Anything you bring up will default to arbitrariness.
For instance, lets assume you claim technology makes humans special. Why? The claim that technology is what makes a human human is just another claim based on convention.

And again your next example, just purely fallacious and begging the question:

To use your favourite example, if fucking another guy in the ass significantly improved intelligence/immunity/muscle mass etc. instead of spreading disease and death, then it would be regarded as moral or harmless and every surviving human society would be pro-buttfucking.

Why is that bad?
Why is spreading disease bad?
Why should we not spread disease? Maybe its good, may it accelerates evolution to increase selective pressure and thus creates better humans in the future, based on your own metrics.

Ultimately your position reduces to something like pain = bad.
Which again, you have no justification for outside of "everyone believes pain is bad therefore its bad"
which is a logical fallacy as I said and simply arbitrary.
By the same metric you could argue that God was real in the middle ages because most people believed in him. This is stupid, straight up.

Your position that morality can't exist without the Cuckstian God is even more retarded because it presupposes the Cuckstian worldview is true AND defines morality in exclusively Cuckstian terms as a universally applicable set of rules to be obeyed unconditionally.

Bro, there is no worldview without faith based presuppositions. Every single claim you made so far about disease being bad, about persecution being bad - every single one is based on blind faith assumptions like pain being bad, that we OUGHT to avoid suffering and such. Yet you cant justify any of these claims, obviously, since you appealed to group consensus which is a logical fallacy.

inb4 "i dont have a worldview"

>Nothing matters anyway
A statement endorsed by the Bible. "Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity." (Ecclesiastes 1:2-11 ESV)

Bible Study level: 0%

The same book also says that we should worship God above all things and no pay attention to the things of this world. We should enjoy the fruit of our labors and praise God. It specifically says that in the last chapter of Ecclesiastes but you didnt read that far.

 

[KARENIN]

The same book also says that we should worship God above all things and no pay attention to the things of this world. We should enjoy the fruit of our labors and praise God. It specifically says that in the last chapter of Ecclesiastes but you didnt read that far.

>"All" doesn't include God hehe
This is why talking to Cuckstians is a waste of time

 

[KARENIN]

I don't mind his faith whatsoever it just bothers me that he's trying to convert people.

" 'All is vanity' except for all the things muh Semitic religion claims are worthwhile"

 

[hopelessAspieNEET]

Bible Study level: 0%

The same book also says that we should worship God above all things and no pay attention to the things of this world. We should enjoy the fruit of our labors and praise God. It specifically says that in the last chapter of Ecclesiastes but you didnt read that far.

Talking to someone like him is a complete waste of time, I didn't bother replying to him after elaboration because it'd change nothing. Dude has deluded himself and hardened his brain to only listen to retarded beliefs that tell him his tribe of people is superior or some shit, if he were to actually try to form a true worldview he'd have been christian already. He is literally reading from a manifesto too, he copied a point from somewhere else which quoted verse 2-11 but he only pasted in verse 2 out of context. He also used the shit esv translation which shows he has zero knowledge on what the bible is.

 

[Based Vampire]

bro most of your sources on pagan culture were preserved by christians


PSSHHT DONT TELL HIM THE BIBLE IS LIKE 99% ACCURATE HISTORICALLY AND THEY EVEN FOUND THE NIGGAS GRAE THAT JUDGED JESUS IN THE GOSPELS IN LIKE 1990 LOL

Caiaphas ossuary - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

dont let him know the bible is one of the most reliable ancient documents ever.
Dont tell him we have an insane amount of preserved original sources, more than for any other historical document.
Dont tell him about the dead sea scrolls which were written 100s of years before Jesus yet show zero alteration to the old testament copies from 1000s of years later.



And besides that, I dont think you can root morality outside an absolute, personal God.

Let's take "might is right" for instance.
A lot of pagans think this is some magic want they can swing around.

You just have to ask why might is right, at which point you just get a bunch of logical fallacies in return
1. is/ought fallacy - "omg nature tells us might is right" - nothing about nature tells us any moral laws whatsoever. Nothing about seeing a bear eat a deer gives us a law that says "superior power justifies any action in any case"

2. appeal to nature fallacy - similar shit, "is natural bro" - fucking each other in the ass is also natural, I know because my dad used to raise rabbits and they do it all the time

3. the more philosophical issue
a)"there is no morality, only might is right" - ok but "might is right" is a moral law. And we already established that you can't get an ought from an is. You cant get moral laws from observations. So "might is right" is not natural but also man made.
b) so how do you know might is right? Its just a faith based assumption you make.
At this point it just defaults to relativism and then absurdity.

Because if you can't explain why you are right outside of saying you believe you are, then you have to explain why having faith is a valid justification. How do you know that having faith in your own convictions is true and valid?
It becomes circular reasoning.
"I know I am right, because I have faith that I am right and I know that having faith is justified because I believe that I am right."

And then it becomes absurd because the next and final step is to ask how you can know that you have faith and that your faith in faith is true and not man made (by you). You can't. So basically, you cant know anyhting, not even that you can know things. The possibility of knowledge itself is destroyed.

The only way out of this is to assume an absolute moral standard outside yourself as a starting position. Any other starting position defaults to absurdity.

You have two problems:
1) you've never read any biblical scholarship outside the conservative evangelic apologist echo chamber
2) you're watching too much Gay Dyer and other presups it would seem

 

[Based Vampire]

And besides that, I dont think you can root morality outside an absolute, personal God.

Atheistic platonism.

Holy shit I just did it!

 

[Based Vampire]

If you read other religious texts or compare the quality of supposed history writings you will realize that it doesn't even come anywhere close to the quality of the biblical canon. Which is a text that is fully consistent, without hypocrisy and writing that repeatedly predicted what would happen perfectly and with things of which the existence of can easily be confirmed. No decieving fuck conspiring against humanity would be able to write a piece anything close to that. Every other religious text written by them is full of contradictions and hypocrisy.

The bible is actually full of contraditions unless you are adopting the 'harmonization' apologetic which is ridiculous. Apply such a standard for any other religious text you get the same result. When we actually look at biblical texts in their ACTUAL historical context we get a mess. Read the scholars.

 

[Based Vampire]

@Based Vampire @KARENIN stop bullying him guys he's a high iq .is rapefugee do you want him to leave just like all the other christcuck larpers?

Not my fault that christcucks can't handle a little criticism of their supposedly holy book

 

[Based Vampire]

cmon let him believe whatever he wants

I'll let him do that as long as he's not barking this nonsense out on this forum.

 

[ZZebra786]

cmon let him believe whatever he wants

no. let him ropemax

 

[Based Vampire]

it's a good book it teaches values. I don't think there's anything wrong with believing there is somebody out there to give us hope and reward the righteous

I don't think so either. The majority of people can't actually handle the truth and hence need some form of religious guidence. I have no problem with this. But let them keep it to themselves and stop spreading their nonsense. As a Lover of Truth I can't stand idly by

 

[ZZebra786]

stop spreading their nonsense.

thats like half of them. lmaoo

 

[Based Vampire]

The truth is that we don't know and that christianity is more of a way of life than a set of beliefs.

for the majority of people yes. Let them be. But there are some among them who would consider themselves missionaries, apologists, 'scholars' who think they can prove their nonsense. It's just irritating. Always amusing to watch them try though

 

[Unemployed]

Hmm, I smell a potential scam.

You scamming?

 

[WeebHunter3000]

Morality is man-made though, it doesn't exist for non-human animals so what's your point?

You seem weirdly obsessed with fucking other guys in the ass. I can see why @WeebHunter3000 got you banned from .is

Average Christian tbh

 

[Based Vampire]

Average Christian tbh

their insecurities need to be treated with homoerotic cuck fantasies tbh

 

[WeebHunter3000]

@Based Vampire @KARENIN stop bullying him guys he's a high iq .is rapefugee do you want him to leave just like all the other christcuck larpers?

Yes. Christains contribute nothing to this forum because their Jewish messiah is their only personality trait.

 

[hopelessAspieNEET]

Yes. Christains contribute nothing to this forum because their Jewish messiah is their only personality trait.

Clearly all those dumb christcucks just want to submit to their imaginary sky daddy. There is no other reason for submission other than cuck nature

 

[WeebHunter3000]

Clearly all those dumb christcucks just want to submit to their imaginary sky daddy. There is no other reason for submission other than cuck nature

Exactly

 

[KARENIN]

literally logical fallacy maxxing. Appealing to group consensus is a logical fallacy and no ta valid justification
so morals are just based on human convention and therefore relative?

You don't appear to understand the logical fallacies you accuse me of, despite spamming shitty wikipedia links. I said morals are formulated by humans based on long-term observation of their effects on communal survival, in a given environment. So the capacity for morality is a product of evolution, and morals are determined by physical reality and measurable effects, not "consensus". Even if 100.0% of society agreed on a given moral, if that moral is divorced from environmental conditions, e.g. unconditional pacifism in the face of violence, then the people who practised said moral will be exterminated and their brand of morality will cease to exist or be regarded as morality-it will be regarded as foolhardy delusion instead.
Interpretation of your Semitic screeds, on the other hand, is very much based on consensus by shitalian gay pedophiles whose celibacy will doom themselves and their Cuckstian morality out of existence.

again, relative morality = no morality. Your position is retarded.

Your position amounts to "You must pursue X moral in every possible situation or in no situation ever" which is the epitome of the "blind faith" you're accusing me of, and utterly retarded because it designates unknown outcomes as good or bad in advance based on a single causal factor. Morality that does not make distinctions is a delusion, divorced from reality.

Bro, there is no worldview without faith based presuppositions. Every single claim you made so far about disease being bad, about persecution being bad - every single one is based on blind faith assumptions like pain being bad, that we OUGHT to avoid suffering and such. Yet you cant justify any of these claims, obviously, since you appealed to group consensus which is a logical fallacy.

Lol sweaty, the material world exists independently of philosophy and worldviews systematised by humans, it existed before homo sapiens emerged as a distinct species and will continue to exist after every last man dies. Given that "worldviews" and "presuppositions" cannot exist without intelligent life forms capable of reason higher-order thought processes, it is morality that exists to serve human survival with respect to material conditions; humans don't need to justify their own survival in terms of moral philosophy. It is a biological fact, not a "blind faith assumption" that pain and disease adversely affect survival and impede reason, so an effective system of morals would naturally be in opposition to them. These morals are an a posteriori worldview formed through observation and analysis of how cause relates to effect, not based on "blind faith", which unconditionally endorses a cause with no regard to actual effect and in the Cuckstian variant, relies entirely on shitalian interpretations of stories by ancient sandniggers.

 

[hopelessAspieNEET]

Lol sweaty

teehee