King Jerry IV of Iberia

🇵🇹Portugal para os Portugueses 🇵🇹

@MLinceMorgado Pondo de parte o caso em particular, a inação é em si uma forma de ação — proibir implica condenação, mas permitir implica “ausência de oposição” Não existe filosofia jurídica sem valores, o que em si torna a expressão “é uma filosifia jurídica não-prescritiva” oximorónico

Perguntas deste tipo são importantes. O Libertarianismo é uma filosofia jurídica, não um sistema moral prescritivo completo. Tem de ser complementado com Tradicionalismo. O incesto é sempre algo depravado, nojento e moralmente condenável. Qualquer libertário que se oponha à degeneração condena atos incestuosos. Só porque acreditamos que algo devia ser legal, isso não significa que achamos que esse algo devia ser celebrado ou promovido na sociedade. Um libertário que se preocupe com valores tradicionais nunca iria dizer que o sexo consentido entre dois irmãos adultos é moral. A única coisa que dizemos é que ninguém, incluindo o Estado, tem o direito de usar força contra esses dois irmãos por causa da sua conduta.

@ErikakHilton Ninguém tem muito interesse no que uma lei faz no sentido puramente formal da mesma — o que é operativo é o que ela funcionalmente faz, ou seja o seu impacto, e isso é completamente separado de quaisquer sejam as motivações por trás de uma lei, sejam elas nobres ou não

Não, o Projeto de Lei que criminaliza a misoginia não proíbe homens de falarem com mulheres. Mas, se você é homem, e acha que esse Projeto vai te proibir de falar com mulheres, o problema está nas coisas que você diz mesmo. E nos faça o favor: fique quieto desde já.

Estão tão enterradas nas vossas abstrações que não vêem (ou não querem ver) quando estas levam a monstruosidades destas Mulher “oprimida” e infeliz? Não há feminismo suficiente. Mulher “livre” mas infeliz na mesma? É porque não há feminismo suficiente Já concluiu o que acha a priori, apenas procura justificações post hoc. Trágico

@inesmorsantos A premissa por trás do feminismo (emancipação da mulher via maximizar a sua liberdade individual) é a mesma que leva a isto Isto é esta mulher a exercer a sua liberdade individual, liberdade para escolher, certo? Mas por pensamento mágico consegue culpá-lo no oposto Triste

O feminismo nunca matou ninguém. O machismo mata todos os dias.

@kangminlee It’s fine, they’re a new person when they decide that they are, so none of that matters, and believe otherwise is Unchristian somehow

We not only have a promiscuity problem among women but also a death problem. 70% of women who abort self-identify as Christian. 43% were attending church at least monthly when they killed their child. Yet whenever this sin is called out, blame instantly shifts to men. Every problem in society is apparently men’s fault, and women need to take no accountability. Having standards as a Christian man apparently makes you a misogynist, incel, or porn addict. This is messaging is indistinguishable from feminists. It’s a lose-lose for men. Women constantly blame men for failing to lead, but when men try to right the wrongs of women and correct course for our depraved society, they're lambasted as insecure women-haters. No wonder the red-pill and manosphere are exploding. Effeminate church leaders offer the same feminist script and have zero answers for disillusioned young men.

@OldeWorldOrder @ItIsHoeMath You’ll just say any argument to justify whatever you already wanted to believe Such an idiotic take, but hey “at least they can’t call me waycist for it”

@ItIsHoeMath Which gives him even more credibility & standing, in my opinion. If even JD's saying it, in his position, then the rest of us can't be called 'radicals' for saying the same thing. Full immigration moratorium is becoming the moderate position. We should embrace that.

JD VANCE: "We cannot rebuild Western civilization by letting millions of migrants into our countries. It has to stop."

No, you are your own God by advising men to not be prudential about some thing but then not doing the same to women for comparable offenses in men — which has nothing to with whether one can be saved, it’s just about not denying material reality Young men simply won’t buy it, and they shouldn’t, because it’s hypocritical – everything to hedonism to leftism / liberalism to outright moral relativism is more compelling because even through they’re wrong, at least they’re somewhat consistent

@KingJerryIV @LizzieMarbach Does the Lord see our padt once we are cleansed by His blood? Answer: no You think man is more discerning and should still look at ones past. Christians should and are commanded to do as Jesus does. You seem to think we shouldn't. You are your own God

Literally no one is making the argument that it’s wrong for men to desire sexual purity when seeking a wife. No one is making the argument that you must marry a woman with promiscuous past. The argument is that redemption is real and women with these pasts can be redeemed. That they can make good & godly wives by the power of the Holy Spirit. That they are not damaged goods. That is the argument being made.

@Ellies2ndaccnt @LizzieMarbach Again, not a replacement for an argument. Shaming tactics aren’t an argument

@KingJerryIV @LizzieMarbach Smh You are ill.

@RealDianeYap It’s perfectly normal to do that kind of thing, men do the same but in different ways, like pretending he doesn’t care about her past when he does, so she feels for comfortable in being truthful about it

The reason women test men is that men are incentivized to lie. When they want sex, they'll lie about wanting commitment. When they want commitment, they'll lie about preferences and how your life together will look. The only way to know the difference between empty words and the truth is observing his actions when he's put in a position where he has to show his hand. If it doesn't happen naturally, she has to test him.

Funny how you pick just the most shocking of the examples I gave to make your point and none of the other, very convenient for you. Still my point stands, but I see, what you want to not be relevant isn't relevant and what you want to be relevant is relevant, totally arbitrary, but very convenient Serial cheating or having stolen something absolutely are comparable, and you saying that only the same action is comparable (in a practical sense, not a moral one) reeks of feminism and "equality brain", yet I'm the one with no grasp on reality? Sure. At least leftists are consistent in their "equality brain"

@KingJerryIV @LizzieMarbach "Comparable bad actions" Rape =consenting sex Not comparable but you are a moral relativist. Comparable would be both men and women sleeping around, watching porn etc. But you cant see this. Im done with this discussion, you have no grasp on reality

I'm not the one here pretending the past doesn't exist just because one converted, you are. But then you also suddenly think the past existed if it's a different kind of bad thing you did, which is totally arbitrary, so you're being a relativist (functionally at least), but only about what you want

@KingJerryIV @LizzieMarbach You are the one practicing moral relativism lol

@Ellies2ndaccnt @LizzieMarbach Attitude of (functional) moral relativism, yes — atheists say there’s nothing wrong with misdeeds, you seem to believe they’re wrong but don’t really matter because you converted or something

@KingJerryIV @LizzieMarbach Attitude of redemption and forgiveness... Ok

@LizzieMarbach Also, not really buying this sudden focus on “consent based morality” — I know you said you don’t believe that, but focusing so much on it leaves a different impression

Merely took your logic to it’s logical conclusion — if the past is wiped upon conversion, and you want to ignore context and material consequences for sin, it’s totally arbitrary to draw the line on these more serious crimes You’re the one with a contradiction to solve, I wouldn’t be celebrating marrying either, you’re the one who applauds one but not the other

Comparing a promiscuous woman to a pedophile, rapist, or murderer is really dumb & major category error. One is a violent act against an innocent party’s will, who cannot defend themselves. The other is a sexually immoral act with willing participants. Per scripture, one is a capital offense, and the other is not.

Bringing them up at all to make a point about the present issue absolutely is a form of comparison, otherwise there’d be no reason to bring them up at all If you wouldn’t object to your daughter marrying a man who notably without knowing the future and just based on his word at the time, then that’s on you, but that’s deeply unwise. You don’t get to argue for that based on what Paul became, that’s not how it works

@KingJerryIV @LizzieMarbach If your reading is that I am comparing myself to them, you don't know how to read. I asked if you had heard of them. Famous Christians who had notably sinned and were forgiven and are known to be great men. I would not object to my daughter marrying Paul, no. It wasn't about me

@wife2sirhusband @LizzieMarbach “Have you ever heard of the Apostle Paul? How about David?” There’s only one reading here You can just say you wouldn’t advise against marrying a rapist, murderer, thief, etc., and at least you’d be consistent

@KingJerryIV @LizzieMarbach I never compared myself to them. True repentance is to turn away, and also the Bible literally addresses exactly this. Have you read it? I'm not sure what your comment about cheating is meant to be, but I hold that Christians initiating a divorce is sin in all circumstances.

But God can forgive anything and make it as though it didn’t happen, right? So it’s funcionally the same, using your logic, if one repents of it, so that distinction no longer applies. Also, I mentioned plenty of other evils, why not mention those? It isn’t a fair comparison because men and women don’t dislike them equally, setting aside the moral issue which I granded already Your stance is pie in the sky as it pertains to actual life of Earth, that’s what I’m trying to demonstrate

No, it is a description to clarify the different between the two. One is the violent trespass against another person’s will, and the other is a sexually immorality act done by their will. Why not compare promiscuous men against promiscuous women? Why is that not a fair comparison?

@Ellies2ndaccnt @LizzieMarbach When I see mass approval of the church ladies about it then it’ll be comparable, until then this is just feminism wearing Christianity as a skinsuit to evade accountability

@KingJerryIV @LizzieMarbach Theres plenty of stories for men Michael Franzese - former gangster turn Christian, married. Johnny Chang.. married and pastor now. Another Horrible story. baptistpress.com/resource-libra… Not to mention Joel Webbon 🤷‍♀️

@Ellies2ndaccnt @LizzieMarbach Remember this next time you wonder why all of culture is going down the drain, because this is your atitude to it Very Boomer-like

@KingJerryIV @LizzieMarbach

So the logic is “do anything you want, just be sorry after and nothing matters”? Also I like the hubris behind comparing yourself to these people. Although I’m happy to know any sin is fine if someone did it in the past, I just have to regret it Hope you apply this to cheating, rape, murder and such, after all all sins can be forgiven

@KingJerryIV @LizzieMarbach Have you ever heard of the Apostle Paul? How about David?