Rank #32197 on CommentsLevel 138 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
OfflineSend mail to onewhoobserves Block onewhoobserves Invite onewhoobserves to be your friend
|Last status update:|| |
|Date Signed Up:||6/12/2013|
|FunnyJunk Career Stats|
|Highest Content Rank:||#11759|
|Highest Comment Rank:||#6459|
|Content Thumbs:||8 total, 14 , 6|
|Comment Thumbs:||412 total, 769 , 357|
|Content Level Progress:|| 20.33% (12/59) |
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
|Comment Level Progress:|| 60% (6/10) |
Level 138 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 139 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
|Total Comments Made:||220|
latest user's comments
|#83 - Hmm...apparently some people have fastened onto my statement a… [+] (1 new reply)||07/20/2016 on Puistir Ducen Yttofecuer||-2|
|#31 - Factually immoral....fact and morals are two contradictory ide… [+] (3 new replies)||07/19/2016 on Puistir Ducen Yttofecuer||-6|
#83 - onewhoobserves (07/20/2016) [-]
Hmm...apparently some people have fastened onto my statement as a defense of homosexuality when it is clearly pointing out the contradiction of the statement "factually immoral." I will reiterate that point now.
Moral: Concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character. (Again, an idea or principle that is subjective to the person or society.) An example in human populations would be the death penalty. Some people consider it immoral to kill another human being for any reason, others see it as fit justice in certain circumstances.
Fact on the hand is something that is tangible or observable. (Again, something that can be touched, seen, measured, etc.) The statement: "homosexuality factually is unnatural" is clearly not factual as there is a plethora of observations to homosexuality happening in other animals (Actually, the number of observed animal species that have been observed is over 1500 according to some sources.) Therefore it is something that occurs naturally among animal species to the extent of our observations so far. It is possible that there may be some outside force that is causing an unnatural behavior among those species, however that is conjecture with no facts to back it up.
It was my mistake in attempting to make two points in one concise sentence rather than separating it out for people to more easily parse. I was both trying to explain the concept of a moral and to address the statement of "homosexuality factually is unnatural." People have apparently conflated the two points rather than taking them separately.
Incest is an interesting topic in the animal kingdom, as it does occur in some of the low order animals. However, this: www.livescience.com/2226-incest-taboo-nature.html is actually an interesting article that speculates that incest among higher order species has been selected against over time as it hurts the genetic diversity of a species.
However, I was unaware that pedophilia was practiced in that many animal species. I would love to see the research on that as I could not seem to find any solid information on that topic.
Infanticide is common in nature in two forms: First, resource scarcity. Typically, it is done in order to conserve the resources that would have gone to the infant and to replenish the resources of the mother. Second, as part of the struggle to pass on their genes. Typically this is a result of a male who will kill the offspring of a female and another male before mating with the aforementioned female in order for his offspring to have a better chance at survival.
I am not condoning or condemning any of these things. I am simply presenting facts impartially and leaving everyone else to make up their own mind about these things according to their own morality.
Though I am certainly glad we can have a reasoned discussion about such a thing without jumping to any conclusions about the mental deficiencies of the person or persons on the other side.
|#56 - It seems like they are taking from the story which involves Br…||07/16/2016 on Rogue One||0|
|#52 - Jan Ors is the female sidekick of Kyle Katarn. Mara Jade prim… [+] (1 new reply)||07/16/2016 on Rogue One||+1|
|#71 - I've not been following the electoral process that closely. H… [+] (8 new replies)||05/12/2016 on Its Happening||0|
#80 - ramerez (05/12/2016) [-]
Isn't it like 17 billion alone for the construction materials? Not adding in labour. Unless he wants to build a wall with mud and sticks.
John Oliver did a section and said it would cost 25 billion to outright build it ( I think that's including labour and all the extras and shit) plus a lot more to maintain it.
#87 - noblexfenrir (05/12/2016) [-]
To be entirely fair, John Oliver is probably the worst person to look at anything Trump proposes objectively. He's honestly a pathetically biased individual who doesn't hold a candle to Stewart.
As for the construction of the wall, it's up in the air at this point concerning it's cost, something of this scale with someone in government who actually gives a shit about the mantra of "ahead of schedule and under budget" and has actually employed that philosophy in the private sector. I've seen many numbers ranging from 8-13.5 billion for materials and in the end we just really can't tell since we aren't privy to what profit margins are going to be acceptable concerning a project of this size from distributors.
In the end, too many variables being examined by people who have never worked in the field.
#88 - ramerez (05/12/2016) [-]
Yeah I agree, I like John Oliver but I do disagree with him on some things. However when it comes to Trumps policies I have to agree with Oliver. All of his major points are so unlikely to happen it confuses me on why people are standing behind him.
To be honest the entire wall thing just sounds like something he blurted out and is to far into it to really back away from it.
Didn't Trump also say he'd be more civilised and professional when he's in office, basically admitting he was pandering to the justified angry masses.
To be clear I'm from the UK so my opinions mean literal jack shit. I'm just more confused on why he's being treated like an actual answer to Americas problems. I understand why he's popular on the internet because he's quite honestly the most cancerous parts of the internet personified and people here love that.
But shit I'm reasonable, if I hear enough good reasons I'd change my mind.
#89 - noblexfenrir (05/12/2016) [-]
"To be honest the entire wall thing just sounds like something he blurted out and is to far into it to really back away from it. "
Except it's completely feasible...the price even at the extreme end of the spectrum is not actually all that much as far as government expenditures go, and he's laid out a fairly sound plan to have mexico fund it either directly or indirectly.
The most difficult part is land acquisition and placement planning for the wall itself in regards to terrain and natural barriers. This is hard in the planning sense, not in the "unrealistic" sense.
"Didn't Trump also say he'd be more civilised and professional when he's in office, basically admitting he was pandering to the justified angry masses. "
He's fairly civilized as he is, people not liking his tone doesn't make it not such. But yes, he has said he will be more "presidential" when the general election is over and he is in office. This isn't him saying he's going to change his entire character, he's made it clear his tone and such are relevant to his current situation. Right now he is in an election where things such as showing the american public he understands why they're angry are important. It's not disingenuous. When he is president he realizes a different tone and presence are required, I hardly see the issue with this.
"he's being treated like an actual answer to Americas problems."
Because many of his policies are answers to the U.S.' problems.
Also you mentioned above a muslim ban is impossible and discriminatory. It's not so much a muslim ban as a ban on immigration from islamic countries, and very specifically ones we are currently in conflict with. This is very feasible, as it has been done before, I believe Obama did it for 6 months during his first term but don't quote me on that I may be wrong. It's well within the power of the president to do so.
#84 - ramerez (05/12/2016) [-]
To be honest all candidates wont be able to act on any of their "policies".
If Bernie somehow won, there's no way in hell he'd be even close to getting universal healthcare. Best case scenario for him is that he maybe lays out the groundwork for one. The taxes on the rich, slightly possible but that would be an uphill battle from start to finish, money sadly goes a long way in your government... in any government really.
If Trump wins, which seems more and more likely with each passing day. He won't be able to "Ban Muslims" from the country because there's no way in hell congress would pass a discriminatory act like that. Also the wall Like I said would be way to expensive (even if they somehow got Mexico to pay for it) and not even be that effective at keeping the people they want to keep out... out.
If Hilary wins, she'll... do whatever her policies are. What even are her policies? Other than lying? Does she want to dine on the dismembered penises of all men who oppose her?
|#70 - I mean not to sound like an ass or anything but it l…||04/14/2016 on Borders, Hypocrites and Cucks||+5|
|#47 - Romans with super powers are best Romans.||01/05/2016 on Anal Adventure||+1|
|#101 - *SPOILER WARNINGS* (DON'T CLICK THIS LINK IF YOU DON'T WANT T…||12/30/2015 on Independent strong woman...||+2|
|#99 - I'm pretty sure that somewhere (not in the movie) it is stated…||12/30/2015 on Independent strong woman...||+4|
|#84 - you absolutely can||12/26/2015 on Gamestop||0|