Fidd Stickler

@Duley90 @ConceptualJames He literally doesn't believe in might makes right, you don't understand is vs. ought.

@ConceptualJames He believes in might makes right philosophy but smuggles it in underhandedly using force doctrine. He had me fooled initially when Charlie Kirk went on the whatever podcast but it becomes clear when you find out he’s a “Christian” Nationalist.

I find this mind-boggling, to be honest, and I'm not arguing that Christians should be pacifists or whatever. The example Wilson gives here about selling your cloak to buy a sword comes from the Gospel of Luke. I'm an agnostic and even know this story. He exegetes it wrong. In fact, he exegetes it completely wrong. The point of the story in Luke is that Jesus knows he's about to be taken by the Romans, so he instructs his disciples to get armed, even telling them to sell their cloaks to buy a sword if they must. The point is not to fight, though, as Wilson uses it to mean. The point is completely otherwise. Jesus actually makes this clear IN THE NEXT SENTENCE, BEFORE HE'S EVEN DONE SPEAKING to his disciples. He is doing it so that when he is taken he will fulfill the prophecy in Isaiah about the Messiah being "numbered among the transgressors." The context is that Romans would see an armed band as transgressors and thus take Jesus into custody upon those terms. When Jesus' disciples say they already have two swords, Jesus replies "it is enough." Enough for what? Fighting off Romans who are there to keep the law? No way. For looking like an armed band of transgressors, which would fulfill the prophecy in Isaiah? Yes. But it's not just speculation. The swords are explicitly NOT for fighting back. When Peter draws his sword in the forthcoming scene and slices the ear off a Roman in Gethsemane (where I have stood), Jesus rebukes him for it, saying whoever takes up the sword will die by it. That's one of the MOST FAMOUS STORIES IN THE WHOLE GOSPEL. His disciples weren't armed to fight back. Fighting back wasn't part of the equation. It's bewildering to me that Wilson would use this particular example to make his point. It reminds me of the time I mixed up the point of the story about the wheat and the tares because I wasn't actually all that familiar with the story but knew of it vaguely. Romans 13 (Paul, not Jesus) makes a better case for the authorities being invested with the authority to use force to maintain safety and order. Even the apt example of Jesus chasing moneychangers out of the Temple with a whip makes the case, but this other thing is simply mind-boggling to see. Even I know better.

@GDolleyes @old_memory

@old_memory Okay fr wtf my most vivid dream was about me going to this gas station in the middle of no where and these prayingmantis people who ran the store kept chasing and running after me. This scared tf outta me just now. No no no.

average long sleep dream

@TradAdvocate @paleochristcon I'm talking about this type of stuff. Celebrating women working instead of families and even having people like Nala Ray there.

Having some low level female employees who are mostly unmarried women is nothing compared to having a female CEO who has two small children at home who just lost their father. It's horrible for TPUSA. And she's bad at the job anyway. It serves no purpose other than to stroke her massive ego.

You didn't win anything. Unfuck America was a disaster and did nothing to challenge Charlie Kirk. TPUSA fell apart because a lunatic trans humper murdered Charlie Kirk. Unfuck America wasnt even a flea on thier ass.

@TradAdvocate @paleochristcon TPUSA was always a bit feminist and didn't have a problem with girl bosses. They recruited conservative women to try to win female votes all the time.

@paleochristcon TPUSA is falling apart because they have terrible leadership. Having a mother of young children running TPUSA goes against everything Charlie stood for, and the top men at TPUSA have the charisma of a wet blanket.

@devin_reilly1 @T00N1X @Battleshiplibra @Pokemonpshot Because pokemon is a false religion.

@T00N1X @Battleshiplibra @Pokemonpshot So if mew is the ancestor of all Pokemon how did arceus create the universe including Pokemon? I’m genuinely curious.

My Teacher: the test isn’t that hard. My test:

@CentsOfSpence @robnoerr @TheBrianShapiro You're going to ask to see his penis just like Brian huh?

@robnoerr @TheBrianShapiro Brother, your fatass hasn’t seen your own penis in decades.

Hi Rob, All joking aside you asked to debate me again just last week. I laughed. I brought you up to Michael and Jack and they had no idea who you were. This is why I debated Alex Stein instead in Phoenix. We sold out tickets. I wish you luck with your Youtube Superchat career, begging your 100 fans for money. " All joking aside " Merry Christmas

@AloneInAField01 @paleochristcon You didn't fight for shit LMAO. You have no clue what you're talking about, you crazy broad.

@paleochristcon I fought in Syria for women's rights against Daesh (ISIS) between 2016-2019. I fought alongside the YPJ for women's autonomy, rights and dignity. You fat turds and the nonsense you preach makes me sick to my stomach. Pair of absolute twats.

This chick is still seething because after the debate I beat her in on whatever (Shes a paycologist or something) she heard me tell Brian I didn't understand why she wore a short t shirt because her gut was hanging out. Lol. Upsetty spaghetti.

@WillPackerMCC @paleochristcon It's not as hard as living in a third world country.

@paleochristcon Is it harder to play than opening a jar of olives?

A hidden gem on the Playstation if you haven't played it is alien dark decent. It's like Xcom with Xenomorphs. Never played a game which captured the atmosphere of the genre better.

@Dz424242 @KEWLV1C He's either crashing out or he's crashed out.

@KEWLV1C The only time Brian isn't crashing out is when he's sleeping.

Bri Shap is crashing out

@No7308463835295 @UCbyJP @Neofamulus38 @TheOmniLiberal Just preference means one or the other isn't better or worse. They are equally valid if it is just preference. It's arbitrary which one you choose.

@FiddStickler @UCbyJP @Neofamulus38 @TheOmniLiberal “Just preference” as if that makes it irrelevant and arbitrary. Just because something is subjective, doesn’t mean it is irrelevant or arbitrary.

Debate what? On whether or not you can have moral preferences without believing in objective moral fact? Sure, give me the exact prompt, one debate of you going over the subject, and a couple of weeks to prepare and I'll gladly do it. As a side-note, I will be expecting the same level of epistemic justification for your perspective as you do for mine, and no amount of you squirming around screaming "internal critique! internal critique!" is going to change that.

@CaptainLibDaddy @TrufflesTheDev You said most of Andrew's debates are circling around definitions or all semantics until exhaustion. I disagree. What I see often in these debates is Andrew asking for a clear definition and then the opponent getting upset because he is "playing semantics", filibustering instead.

@FiddStickler @TrufflesTheDev what in the world are you talking about. Are you arguing with yourself?

Andrew Wilson can't debate , just run circles around definitions. What a pussy. Too busy letting men impregnate his wife so he can raise the kids.

@CaptainLibDaddy @TrufflesTheDev So according to you, clarifying a definition is semantics, but your opponent refusing to define terms and equivocating with vague language is not semantics Is that right? Every time you try to define something with a lefty they dance around and refuse to do it and then blame you

@TrufflesTheDev If its all semantics every time till exhaustion, its pure slop

@UCbyJP @Neofamulus38 @TheOmniLiberal It's not an inaccurate simplification. I prefer human fetuses not be murdered. Another guy says he thinks it's fine. There is no objective threshold breaker for us if moral facts don't exist. That's what it boils down to, you don't need to "criminally" complicate it.

@FiddStickler @Neofamulus38 @TheOmniLiberal Calling it "just preference" is a criminally oversimplification.

@UCbyJP @Neofamulus38 @TheOmniLiberal Or you just grant the position that moral facts don't exist and argue from there. Which is what Andrew is pointing out. If they don't exist, it's just preference.

@Neofamulus38 @TheOmniLiberal What's in question is if it's even the case that moral facts exist, and if they do, where do they come from? If you say "god" then you have another burden of proof on your shoulders. A heavy one at that. "Without moral facts" assume they exist. So... Prove it!

@thechosenberg Literal inversion of the parents roles. That's when the mom is doing it wrong.

Kids dont forget these things later on

@y_gebregiorgis @paleochristcon He does often in his Christian nationalism vs. secular humanism debates. He lays out empirical facts of how Christian societies have better outcomes. It always gets stuck in the other person's worldview though because they have retarded views that fall apart.

@paleochristcon you don't debate tbf, all you do interrogate your opponents aggressively until they fumble. Never seen you actually build case for your side of the debate.

I dont see you saying "Yes let's debate this" Lol. Hahahahahaha.

@Segah02457547 This is the type of thinking that is going to make your country and people go extinct.

夜泣きもしない、ウンコも漏らさない、わがままも言わない、さらに超美人で超優秀で親を盲愛する「理想の娘」で子育てごっこするのはそりゃ気持ちいいだろうけど、それをきっかけに子育てしたいとか言い出すやつは全員ヤバすぎだと思う。

@JPoliticalChess @triggerpod @paleochristcon The post modernist would change the definition of punch to require a certain amount of force or something like this and then say the action did not meet the definition, therefore they just touched you and you were not punched.

@triggerpod @paleochristcon There is moral objectivity programmed into our reality even if there's subjective disagreement on what is or isn't moral. If I'm punched and the person who punches me claims I wasn't. Whether I was punched is not subjective despite the disagreement. I either was or I was not.

“From Destiny's standpoint, there's no such thing as a moral fact. None. They don't exist. Everything is dependent upon stance.” What are the philosophical underpinnings behind the left–right divide? Andrew Wilson @paleochristcon breaks it down: moral relativism vs moral realism. Subjective vs objective truth. Rights vs duties. Progress vs tradition. That’s the real clash.

@OrthodoxMugi @revenant_MMXX Right above backspace.

@revenant_MMXX What about the delete button? Or the home/end buttons? I use these.

96% is the best layout. Still has numpad, but deletes the useless nav cluster

@LatvanyMate @AlexeiStroi @TheNC64 @FalconryFinance Well your intention here in this reply is to goad my insults. That's all your after

@FiddStickler @AlexeiStroi @TheNC64 @FalconryFinance The go-pro on his head is the evidence. You are literally watching the go-pro footage not the main cameras'. The go-pro should not be turned dow. Dial down your insults, it was a misunderstanding from your part.

Boomer remover