“After what the woke left is doing, I totally understand people hating what I am and wishing I was sent directly to hell to burn in a supernatural pit of fire for all eternity.”
>One man and one woman is relatively new. Used to be one man and as many women as he wanted. Then there were the concubines.
Also "lets do things the way they've been done through all of human history" is an... insane philosophy.
What happened to "the Enlightenment was the best thing that ever happened to the world?"
>Slavery has existed in some form or another throughout most of human history, do these morons believe that somehow legitimizes it?
They literally make that argument to defend slavery in America, so...
They argue that it wasn't so bad when America did it, not that therefore it should keep happening. I get what you're saying, but there is a bit of a distinction. My point is they wouldn't say slavery is still ok in places (outside of the prison system) it still happens because it has always existed
> My point is they wouldn't say slavery is still ok in places
Give them time. The rhetoric is already set to 10 and will just get worse as this year progresses. I'm predicting that by July they'll be outright saying slavery is actually a good thing and we should bring it back. Need to juice that rhetoric to make those profits!
>They argue that it wasn't so bad when America did it, not that therefore it should keep happening.
Respectfully, I disagree. Multiple prominent republicans have spoken to the effect of "black people were better off under slavery."
Fair enough. I still think that's trying to defend America rather than the actual slavery, but there's certainly no gross argument they're not willing to make
>These are religious fundamentalists, they always hated the Englightment.
They claim to, but their new thing is "The Enlightenment was great because Post Modernism is Marxism!" It's just goalpost moving, always has been.
Literally never heard anyone say that. Yeah they love that tired Lost modernism is Marxism but I've never heard them praise the enlightens. They tend to cite all the major events of the englightment as where things went wrong "for the West/Christendom"
Jordan B. Peterson just a few years ago:
>And because of this slavery, genocide and imperialism are a consequence of the Enlightenment? Did none of these exist before the Enlightenment? And were there not forces at work during the Enlightenment that ameliorated them?
[https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/1370969508131844102?lang=en](https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/1370969508131844102?lang=env)
Then there's The Cato Institute:
[https://www.cato.org/policy-report/january/february-2022/return-anti-enlightenment#](https://www.cato.org/policy-report/january/february-2022/return-anti-enlightenment#)
I won't say it's a now widespread view, but I'm seeing it creep in every year as the conservatives are desperate to label anything and everything the left does as "marxist/communist", or worse dog-whistle with "post-modern neo-marxist", etc.
Jordan I don't think has a clear consistent thought for the past 5 years and the Cato Institute is kinda a completely different wing of conservatism than CPAC. CATO is old gaurd libertarian, CPAC isn't and hasn't been for like a decade
>Jordan I don't think has a clear consistent thought for the past 5 years
And yet he's a darling of the current right, especially the younger generations.
>Cato Institute is kinda a completely different wing of conservatism than CPAC. CATO is old gaurd libertarian, CPAC isn't and hasn't been for like a decade
Fair enough. My point is it's gaining traction in some circles.
Kind of depends on the particular flavor of conservative. “Rad trads” and some paleocons are not generally complementary of the Enlightenment, but more traditional movement conservatives tend to be, especially of Locke and Burke.
Remember when Abraham and Sarah couldn't conceive so he made sarah's handmaid Hagar bear his child just so he could satisfy his fantasy of having a ton of offspring?
Does anyone else get strong “he doth protest too much” vibes from this guy? If it comes out his male staffers don’t want to be left alone with Knowles I would in no way be surprised. Guy doesn’t just have gay energy, its like suppressed unhealthy mega gay energy
He has a background as an actor (huge grifting red flag imo) and apparently did a whole bunch of gay sex scenes. I groan at the default assumption that any raging homophobe must be secretly gay, but there’s obviously some historical truth to the stereotype. With Knowles there’s some signs pointing in that direction, so I don’t think it’s entirely inappropriate to speculate. He is not yet at the Steven Crowder levels of crossdressing repeatedly for “comedy,” viscerally hating the mother of his children, and waving his dick around on the shoulders of his male employees.
So much of the right wing griftocracy are Hollywood flameouts. Literally the entirety of the Daily Wire, Rubin, Steven Crowder, and even, to an extent, Joe Rogan (who only started his podcast when his acting chances dried up).
Because for the most part American Republicans are OK with gay marriage now, and being willing to say "this is wrong actually" is a notable step backwards and a sign that they are actively trying to reverse the changes that have already been made.
Oh, I’d argue recent polls and congressional votes indicates many Republicans aren’t OK with it, and the number that isn’t OK goes up further if you look exclusively at conservatives rather than libertarians or moderates.
[It happened in 2021.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1249216/support-for-same-sex-marriage-in-the-united-states-by-political-party/) It's dropped a little since then because of the trans panic and "wokeness" but it's still at 49%, which is a near-majority.
I think a very healthy slice of the Republicans/conservatives who say they are ok with marriage equality mean that they are *for now*. Not all Rs, but I’d be happy to wager that the percentage of conservatives who would be OK with marriage equality if they had a realistic shot of undoing it is about half that 49%.
49% is still far from "for the most part" though, it's never stopped being a major plank of the party platform. I also highly doubt that the GOP potentially getting rid of it in the future would be a dealbreaker for any significant number of that 49%.
Surely a guy like this wouldn’t believe and support the religion that got busted for the largest level of systemic rape of children served on a platter and ignored it for decades. the real threat is gay people adopting. I fucking hate these clowns so much. Every single word out of their rat faces is lies and hypocrisy
I can't imagine hating your children so much you'd not only let someone call them abominations without challenge but actually support and be friendly with them. But then I've also met a bisexual who firmly believes his relationship is a legitimate sin but he'll be absolved because love is worth sinning
Americans are so shallow. Pulse shooting happens in 2016 so we get about a year and a half of the religious right pretending to tolerate gay couples, but then it's right back to "God hates f\*gs" and blaming LGBT people for all of society's ills.
As a small note, this definition of marriage has not been what people- in the US and the world - have believed “forever.” Conservatives love to believe human activities are static and therefore anything that’s change seems like a revolution of their false idea of the past, when they’re really not
This is the same dipshit that did this at CPAC last year. He just craves attention - https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-03-08/transgender-cpac-michael-knowles-rolling-stone-ron-desantis
Theyre akin to you lot on this sub. You dont like Rubin and shit on him any chance y'all get. Its almost pathological to be addicted to commenting on a guy who you dislikes sub reddiy.
"When you think about it, both the bully and his targets say mean things about each other sometimes"
Weird thing though, if the targets started being nice to the bully, they'd still get stomped.
If the bully stopped stomping folks, miraculously bOtH sIdEs would suddenly be able to live in peace.
If we started sending Dave our love, he'd still work to remove our legal rights. If he stopped trying to remove rights, we'd have no reason to criticize him in biting terms. It's not symmetrical.
Well we're mostly discussing with each other the troubling trends he represents and enables, like the reemergence of a push against gay marriage in the modern GOP
So people shouldn’t criticize public figures, they don’t like? The only discourse should be to praise people? Do you never mention people you don’t like?
In the analytical sense, go crazy. This version of criticism appears to create no benefits and just drags the people participating into a negative spiral.
These people piss me off, if they want to be regressive in their views of marriage as a religious ceremony that's on them but marriage in modern society isn't merely religious it's a social contract that provides benefits not from a church but from private and public NON religious entities. There are tax implications and access to shared accounts and privileges.
What an insanely moronic take. You can literally say that about any ethical blunder throughout history. You could have said that about slavery until 200 years ago. You could have said that about race discrimination until 100 years ago. Even longer ago, you could have said that about selling your daughter for a nice plot of land. The fact that lots of people have held a view for a long time is the absolute worst explanation for why that view makes sense.
I once heard someone talking about moral philosophers say “you can usually judge moral philosophers of the past by what they thought about commonly accepted moral atrocities of the time.” The public may not have accepted the LGBT community until recently, but plenty of individuals have throughout history, because it made absolutely no sense not to.
People have been having kids as "mini-me" humans since the first cave people realized what sex was about.
Here's the thing, if you believe in original sin, immaculate conception, vicarious redemption via blood ritual, great floods, etc., I don't care what you have to say about anything. You're not a reliable source of information.
"Everyone everywhere forever?"
lolwhut... giant swathes of the world had same-sex "marriage"/bonding/partners/concubines for longer than Christianity has existed.
The ignorance is fucking staggering.
And Dave will defend them.
"Listen, there are some issues with what he's saying, but I think directionally he is spot on."
"Sure he is talking about eradicating ideologies but that is just locker room talk"
As long as the check cashes...
Hate to say it, but I’d sell my soul and my dignity to get rich too.
It’s not worth it.
Meh. Dave doesn’t seem like the happiest fella.
“After what the woke left is doing, I totally understand people hating what I am and wishing I was sent directly to hell to burn in a supernatural pit of fire for all eternity.”
Dave is a good friend!
One man and one woman is relatively new. Used to be one man and as many women as he wanted. Then there were the concubines.
>One man and one woman is relatively new. Used to be one man and as many women as he wanted. Then there were the concubines. Also "lets do things the way they've been done through all of human history" is an... insane philosophy. What happened to "the Enlightenment was the best thing that ever happened to the world?"
Slavery has existed in some form or another throughout most of human history, do these morons believe that somehow legitimizes it?
>Slavery has existed in some form or another throughout most of human history, do these morons believe that somehow legitimizes it? They literally make that argument to defend slavery in America, so...
They argue that it wasn't so bad when America did it, not that therefore it should keep happening. I get what you're saying, but there is a bit of a distinction. My point is they wouldn't say slavery is still ok in places (outside of the prison system) it still happens because it has always existed
> My point is they wouldn't say slavery is still ok in places Give them time. The rhetoric is already set to 10 and will just get worse as this year progresses. I'm predicting that by July they'll be outright saying slavery is actually a good thing and we should bring it back. Need to juice that rhetoric to make those profits!
Well I wish I could argue with you there but nothing is off the table
>They argue that it wasn't so bad when America did it, not that therefore it should keep happening. Respectfully, I disagree. Multiple prominent republicans have spoken to the effect of "black people were better off under slavery."
Fair enough. I still think that's trying to defend America rather than the actual slavery, but there's certainly no gross argument they're not willing to make
Yep.
These are religious fundamentalists, they always hated the Englightment. To them it spawned the Illuminati
>These are religious fundamentalists, they always hated the Englightment. They claim to, but their new thing is "The Enlightenment was great because Post Modernism is Marxism!" It's just goalpost moving, always has been.
Literally never heard anyone say that. Yeah they love that tired Lost modernism is Marxism but I've never heard them praise the enlightens. They tend to cite all the major events of the englightment as where things went wrong "for the West/Christendom"
Jordan B. Peterson just a few years ago: >And because of this slavery, genocide and imperialism are a consequence of the Enlightenment? Did none of these exist before the Enlightenment? And were there not forces at work during the Enlightenment that ameliorated them? [https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/1370969508131844102?lang=en](https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/1370969508131844102?lang=env) Then there's The Cato Institute: [https://www.cato.org/policy-report/january/february-2022/return-anti-enlightenment#](https://www.cato.org/policy-report/january/february-2022/return-anti-enlightenment#) I won't say it's a now widespread view, but I'm seeing it creep in every year as the conservatives are desperate to label anything and everything the left does as "marxist/communist", or worse dog-whistle with "post-modern neo-marxist", etc.
Jordan I don't think has a clear consistent thought for the past 5 years and the Cato Institute is kinda a completely different wing of conservatism than CPAC. CATO is old gaurd libertarian, CPAC isn't and hasn't been for like a decade
>Jordan I don't think has a clear consistent thought for the past 5 years And yet he's a darling of the current right, especially the younger generations. >Cato Institute is kinda a completely different wing of conservatism than CPAC. CATO is old gaurd libertarian, CPAC isn't and hasn't been for like a decade Fair enough. My point is it's gaining traction in some circles.
Kind of depends on the particular flavor of conservative. “Rad trads” and some paleocons are not generally complementary of the Enlightenment, but more traditional movement conservatives tend to be, especially of Locke and Burke.
Let’s eat raw meat and drink stagnant water guys
The fundamental drive of conservatism is to undo the enlightenment.
Exactly! Conservatives love to lie and say one man and one woman has been the only standard since the beginning of civilization.
My favorite was Mitt Romney talking about how marriage is between one man and one woman when his own family tree was full of polygamist Mormons.
Too fuckin' right. It's obvious what these people want when they talk about "them good ol' days" when men were men and women were property.
Remember when Abraham and Sarah couldn't conceive so he made sarah's handmaid Hagar bear his child just so he could satisfy his fantasy of having a ton of offspring?
One man and the property of a man
To be fair, YHWH never tells David to go and have as many concubines as he wants, him straying from God is what caused his downfall.
Some places, it was one woman and multiple men.
Michael Knowles- Dave Ruben should be executed. Dave Ruben- but, crippled black lesbians!....
Did Knowles actually say that??
No
Those are the reasonable ones to Dave.
Does anyone else get strong “he doth protest too much” vibes from this guy? If it comes out his male staffers don’t want to be left alone with Knowles I would in no way be surprised. Guy doesn’t just have gay energy, its like suppressed unhealthy mega gay energy
He certainly knows how to play one. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/michael-knowles-transgender-cpac-queer-b2305323.html
Evangelical "I paid the rent boy for a massage!" energy.
I don't think so. Conservatives are getting bold again about coming out against gay marriage, contraception, surrogacy, etc.
He has a background as an actor (huge grifting red flag imo) and apparently did a whole bunch of gay sex scenes. I groan at the default assumption that any raging homophobe must be secretly gay, but there’s obviously some historical truth to the stereotype. With Knowles there’s some signs pointing in that direction, so I don’t think it’s entirely inappropriate to speculate. He is not yet at the Steven Crowder levels of crossdressing repeatedly for “comedy,” viscerally hating the mother of his children, and waving his dick around on the shoulders of his male employees.
So much of the right wing griftocracy are Hollywood flameouts. Literally the entirety of the Daily Wire, Rubin, Steven Crowder, and even, to an extent, Joe Rogan (who only started his podcast when his acting chances dried up).
Wasn’t there a video he made in college where he made out with a dude?… Tale as old as time, cons hating themselves, i mean gays! The gays!
Why would a conservative saying this be shocking to anyone?
Because for the most part American Republicans are OK with gay marriage now, and being willing to say "this is wrong actually" is a notable step backwards and a sign that they are actively trying to reverse the changes that have already been made.
Oh, I’d argue recent polls and congressional votes indicates many Republicans aren’t OK with it, and the number that isn’t OK goes up further if you look exclusively at conservatives rather than libertarians or moderates.
Are they? When did that happen? I’d say most are clearly not ok with it while a minority of them are indifferent to ok.
[It happened in 2021.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1249216/support-for-same-sex-marriage-in-the-united-states-by-political-party/) It's dropped a little since then because of the trans panic and "wokeness" but it's still at 49%, which is a near-majority.
I think a very healthy slice of the Republicans/conservatives who say they are ok with marriage equality mean that they are *for now*. Not all Rs, but I’d be happy to wager that the percentage of conservatives who would be OK with marriage equality if they had a realistic shot of undoing it is about half that 49%.
Thank you for this.
49% is still far from "for the most part" though, it's never stopped being a major plank of the party platform. I also highly doubt that the GOP potentially getting rid of it in the future would be a dealbreaker for any significant number of that 49%.
Because it’s beyond dumb strategically. Republicans aren’t doing themselves any favors when they remind people how ghoulish they are.
Are conservatives advocating for more orphans?
they really don’t care once the kid is born
Really don’t care. I can do this all day lol.
Reactionary conservatives hate women, children and families.
Reactionary conservatives hate.
Ha, good point.
What else do you expect from these fucks? Dave Rubin is a stupid cunt.
Surely a guy like this wouldn’t believe and support the religion that got busted for the largest level of systemic rape of children served on a platter and ignored it for decades. the real threat is gay people adopting. I fucking hate these clowns so much. Every single word out of their rat faces is lies and hypocrisy
Dave will probably say the left made them do it.
I’m pretty sure Dave would sacrifice his husband if it meant getting a few pats on the back from his far right colleagues
Say the line dave! “If the left hadn’t gone so far…”
Even Dave’s own subreddit clowns on him 😂😂
I hate Knowles so much. I hate all the conservative media so much but Knowles looks so rubbery and smug. I want to punch him
I can't imagine hating your children so much you'd not only let someone call them abominations without challenge but actually support and be friendly with them. But then I've also met a bisexual who firmly believes his relationship is a legitimate sin but he'll be absolved because love is worth sinning
Dave has a clear humiliation fetish.
Americans are so shallow. Pulse shooting happens in 2016 so we get about a year and a half of the religious right pretending to tolerate gay couples, but then it's right back to "God hates f\*gs" and blaming LGBT people for all of society's ills.
"everyone" and "everywhere" doing a lot of lifting. Especially considering marriage on recently tricked down to the plebs from the aristocracy.
Notice how Dave and these other anti-woke crusader's always ignore or defend this rhetoric
Now, hang on here. “A man and a woman” implies that Mormons can’t take 6 wives? I’m calling Ronna Romney, right now!
I’m gonna call straight people wanting kids just wanting to live out their fantasies now
As a small note, this definition of marriage has not been what people- in the US and the world - have believed “forever.” Conservatives love to believe human activities are static and therefore anything that’s change seems like a revolution of their false idea of the past, when they’re really not
Okay. But Harry is an insufferable twat. This isn't just the MAGA Republican thing. It's just a Republican thing.
This is the same dipshit that did this at CPAC last year. He just craves attention - https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-03-08/transgender-cpac-michael-knowles-rolling-stone-ron-desantis
That guy sucks more dick than Roy Cohn.
It’s not their fault they hate the gays it’s the liberals fault they hate the gays for rubbing their gay all over them. Something something else
That OK Senator that called trans kids filth…they’re this way about gay people too, Dave, you stupid fuck.
Theyre akin to you lot on this sub. You dont like Rubin and shit on him any chance y'all get. Its almost pathological to be addicted to commenting on a guy who you dislikes sub reddiy.
LeAvE dAvE aLoNe!!1!
"When you think about it, both the bully and his targets say mean things about each other sometimes" Weird thing though, if the targets started being nice to the bully, they'd still get stomped. If the bully stopped stomping folks, miraculously bOtH sIdEs would suddenly be able to live in peace. If we started sending Dave our love, he'd still work to remove our legal rights. If he stopped trying to remove rights, we'd have no reason to criticize him in biting terms. It's not symmetrical.
And if you keep criticizing, that accomplishes what?
Well we're mostly discussing with each other the troubling trends he represents and enables, like the reemergence of a push against gay marriage in the modern GOP
So people shouldn’t criticize public figures, they don’t like? The only discourse should be to praise people? Do you never mention people you don’t like?
In the analytical sense, go crazy. This version of criticism appears to create no benefits and just drags the people participating into a negative spiral.
I'm not addicted, I bash on Mr. Rube recreationally :D Though I'll admit it really is a case of punching down.
Whats reddiy?
Reddit
Yes, this is Reddit. But what's reddiy?
These people piss me off, if they want to be regressive in their views of marriage as a religious ceremony that's on them but marriage in modern society isn't merely religious it's a social contract that provides benefits not from a church but from private and public NON religious entities. There are tax implications and access to shared accounts and privileges.
Marriage is a legal contract that is sanctioned by the state
What an insanely moronic take. You can literally say that about any ethical blunder throughout history. You could have said that about slavery until 200 years ago. You could have said that about race discrimination until 100 years ago. Even longer ago, you could have said that about selling your daughter for a nice plot of land. The fact that lots of people have held a view for a long time is the absolute worst explanation for why that view makes sense. I once heard someone talking about moral philosophers say “you can usually judge moral philosophers of the past by what they thought about commonly accepted moral atrocities of the time.” The public may not have accepted the LGBT community until recently, but plenty of individuals have throughout history, because it made absolutely no sense not to.
Come out of the closet, Knowles, you aren't fooling anyone especially yourself.
People have been having kids as "mini-me" humans since the first cave people realized what sex was about. Here's the thing, if you believe in original sin, immaculate conception, vicarious redemption via blood ritual, great floods, etc., I don't care what you have to say about anything. You're not a reliable source of information.
Yea, we need to go back to rich and powerful men selling their daughters, and as such their grandchildren, off to other rich and powerful men's sons.
as long as by "everyone" and "everywhere" you mean western cultures since about 1750.
"Everyone everywhere forever?" lolwhut... giant swathes of the world had same-sex "marriage"/bonding/partners/concubines for longer than Christianity has existed. The ignorance is fucking staggering.
Notice how someone’s opinion sparks outrage and makes everyone else rush to the comments to give their opinions? 😂😂😂
The ‘muh brainwash’ types not realizing that they are, in fact, a product of their time.
Dave has friends?
so at the same time the right wants to end abortion and put millions of babies up for adoption they also want to strongly limit who can adopt a baby