x
Click to expand

usafperson

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:9/06/2011
Last Login:2/18/2015
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#4390
Highest Content Rank:#16394
Highest Comment Rank:#2987
Content Thumbs: 39 total,  69 ,  30
Comment Thumbs: 2066 total,  2468 ,  402
Content Level Progress: 72.88% (43/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 18% (18/100)
Level 218 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 219 Comments: Comedic Genius
Subscribers:1
Content Views:25519
Times Content Favorited:1 times
Total Comments Made:297
FJ Points:2138

latest user's comments

#118 - Interesting. Thanks! I do like to think that when we celebrate… 11/21/2014 on Thanksgiving 0
#20 - Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Thanksgiving originally ce…  [+] (7 new replies) 11/21/2014 on Thanksgiving +56
User avatar #116 - rhetoricalfunny (11/21/2014) [-]
Yes, the first one.

Thanksgiving however became a tradition that was practiced after every 'victory' over the Natives in the Pequot Wars.

This lasted until Lincoln during the civil war said there should be only one thanksgiving per year, as he ordered soldier to march on the starving Sioux.

That's the short version. www.manataka.org/page269.html

Regarding history like this. All I care about is that you know what happened. I don't want you to feel guilty about fuck. I don't believe in white guilt, it's all bullshit.

But white people did some fucked up shit in the past. On a side note, the overall conquest of natives persisted into this century through a much forgotten thing called Residential Schools. Which is why reserves are so damned destitute.
User avatar #118 - usafperson (11/21/2014) [-]
Interesting. Thanks! I do like to think that when we celebrate thanksgiving now, it reflective of the first one.
User avatar #88 - ryderjbudde (11/21/2014) [-]
People say there's no record of that ever happening and would rather believe against logic and reason that it's actually the celebration of the slaughter of natives.
User avatar #119 - rhetoricalfunny (11/21/2014) [-]
It actually is a celebration of slaughter.
Seeabovecomment
User avatar #147 - ryderjbudde (11/22/2014) [-]
Well it isn't anymore. The last Thanksgiving I went to was about being thankful for what we have.
User avatar #149 - rhetoricalfunny (11/22/2014) [-]
Yep and the day after you all went batshit crazy trying to get the best deals.

Congratulations. We have literally one day to be thankful for during a 365 year period. And it just so happens to be a celebration of laughter where natives heads are kicked around.

I get that the nature of shit changes. But you can't blatantly deny that Thanksgiving WAS a celebration of slaughter. That shit happened. Heads were kicked through the streets like soccer balls. There are valid fucking reasons for people to not celebrate it. Maybe not white people.

But if you need to assign a single day to be thankful throughout the entire year. Then you're a pretty ungrateful little shit.
#31 - guitarassassin (11/21/2014) [-]
You're right, but since when have SJWs been logical at all?
#30 - You're trying to measure the absence of something. There is no… 11/20/2014 on serious questions +8
#295 - Cis- check White- check Male- check Privilege- ... 11/20/2014 on attention straight white males 0
#257 - Comment deleted 11/20/2014 on Evolution and Bible 0
#255 - Comment deleted  [+] (1 new reply) 11/20/2014 on Evolution and Bible +1
#257 - usafperson Comment deleted by usafperson
#36 - The automatic car transmission, while invented by a Canadian, …  [+] (3 new replies) 11/15/2014 on Dodge +19
User avatar #37 - TheHutchie (11/15/2014) [-]
Perhaps that explains it then. Interesting either way.
User avatar #138 - greyhoundfd (11/15/2014) [-]
What I've been told is that gas is fairly cheap in the US compared to other countries, and manual allows for you to shift into fifth or sixth gear, allowing your engine to run more efficiently at high speeds.
#185 - expressway (11/15/2014) [-]
This is changing with new innovations, however. Take Dodge, their new 8 speed automatic tranny is faster than any human at shifting (therefore faster track times) and more fuel efficient.
#4 - >manly man >too self conscious to shake the piss off…  [+] (2 new replies) 11/11/2014 on Now that we're men +184
#5 - anonexplains (11/11/2014) [-]
That's the joke
User avatar #10 - phisko (11/11/2014) [-]
No, the joke is that he used a women on the other side of the wall to wipe his dick
#31 - 90% of European cars are just econoboxes. The ones that aren't… 11/02/2014 on Corvette, the american... +1
#157 - thank based mom 10/28/2014 on The Factual Feminist on... +10
#75 - Yeah, when googling it myself, I found that along with what ju…  [+] (2 new replies) 10/28/2014 on 'Merica 0
User avatar #78 - xlelez (10/28/2014) [-]
well one thing could be a form of negative income tax or Basic living Income

remove minimum wage, welfare, and a multitude of other social programs (excluding medical ones) and replace it with this form of basic income redistribution.

Proponents main argument against this is that it makes people slackers who won't work but at this moment in time much of our work and productivity is done by very few people, the rest are just there to fill quotas or do grunt labor that they haven't automated or can't automate yet. Remember that add in SanFran? the one with the tablet showing automated tellers? BOOM. like they won't do that anyway. There simply won't be enough jobs to give people any real kind of living and minimum wage is only helping if people are actually being employed. Some would say that doing so forces companies to automate but the thing is that to make human labor equivalent to automated labor you'd have to pay people such small amounts that you'd basically create slums overnight like the ones you see in 3rd world countries... and that's pathetic and exactly why we shouldn't do that.
User avatar #79 - xlelez (10/28/2014) [-]
Ad* as in Advertisement (sorry my bad)
#50 - Not saying you're wrong, but do you have something backing up …  [+] (4 new replies) 10/28/2014 on 'Merica 0
User avatar #69 - xlelez (10/28/2014) [-]
I think actually the original reasoning behind minimum wage was to protect workers against low-balling the labor costs where the choice was 'work for a dollar a day or we'll have someone else do the work". When there was a massive influx of workers and not enough labor back in the late 1800's early 1900's (if not earlier)

Oliver Twist kind of shit. Kids working like slaves and crap like that.
I think though that it would be reasonable to assume they would have put that lower limit, the 'minimum wage' at a rate common to a poor yet survivable level (enough for a small room/board, some savings, food, probably around 8-10 bucks a day compared to that dollar per day)
User avatar #75 - usafperson (10/28/2014) [-]
Yeah, when googling it myself, I found that along with what juicymucus was saying both being offered as the original reasoning. Either way, I think I disagree with the concept of minimum wage, but perhaps replacing it with a better system could be better. Don't ask me what system though cuz I don't know haha. Child labor laws are their own deal of course though.
User avatar #78 - xlelez (10/28/2014) [-]
well one thing could be a form of negative income tax or Basic living Income

remove minimum wage, welfare, and a multitude of other social programs (excluding medical ones) and replace it with this form of basic income redistribution.

Proponents main argument against this is that it makes people slackers who won't work but at this moment in time much of our work and productivity is done by very few people, the rest are just there to fill quotas or do grunt labor that they haven't automated or can't automate yet. Remember that add in SanFran? the one with the tablet showing automated tellers? BOOM. like they won't do that anyway. There simply won't be enough jobs to give people any real kind of living and minimum wage is only helping if people are actually being employed. Some would say that doing so forces companies to automate but the thing is that to make human labor equivalent to automated labor you'd have to pay people such small amounts that you'd basically create slums overnight like the ones you see in 3rd world countries... and that's pathetic and exactly why we shouldn't do that.
User avatar #79 - xlelez (10/28/2014) [-]
Ad* as in Advertisement (sorry my bad)
#12 - Picture 10/28/2014 on Buy shit +9
#105 - You could also just watch some tv or movies once in a while. I… 10/25/2014 on Why, Why -1
#104 - Picture 10/25/2014 on Why, Why -1
#103 - And I'm not gonna go and do research paper for you, but here a… 10/25/2014 on Why, Why -1
#102 - I make these arguments, addressing your claims and showing the… 10/25/2014 on Why, Why -1
#101 - Oh my goodness. Ugh. Okay, look at what you’ve been saying a… 10/25/2014 on Why, Why -1
#98 - Also, the P in WASP stands for protestant, which is a kind of … 10/25/2014 on Why, Why -1
#97 - >I won't dismiss this one outright as long as you can show …  [+] (7 new replies) 10/25/2014 on Why, Why -1
User avatar #100 - nigeltheoutlaw (10/25/2014) [-]
You're seriously no better than a feminazi. All you do is cherry pick some anecdotal stories to try and justify your self-imposed victimization, regardless of whether or not it's real.
#99 - nigeltheoutlaw (10/25/2014) [-]
And you can also get fired for being a female, or black, or a fucking toaster. That doesn't make it legal. Do you even know what anti-discrimination laws are?

Then link to them. Back it up with some facts, such as a study that is showing a nationwide increase in the thefts.

Okay, I can see now that no matter what is said or how anecdotal your stories are, you're going to insist that everyone in America hates a proper god fearing Christian. Have fun with your delusions, I'm not going to waste another minute attempting to beat some critical thought into you.
User avatar #105 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
You could also just watch some tv or movies once in a while. It's pretty hard to miss usually.
#104 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
User avatar #102 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
I make these arguments, addressing your claims and showing the faults in your counter-arguments. Instead of making new arguments, or arguing for reinforcing your old ones, you instead put words in my mouth, using a straw-man fallacy, comparing me to a feminazi instead of attacking the point (another fallacy, Fallacious Ad hominem), and posting a GIF that really serves no purpose other than to add some passive-aggressive humor against me. Fallacies everywhere. I understand you might not know when to stop, but maybe take a step back and give it some real thought, that maybe Christians, while not being hated by everyone in America, are being hated on more now than they were 10 years ago. This was my point, and this is what you argued not to be true.
User avatar #101 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
Oh my goodness. Ugh. Okay, look at what you’ve been saying and look at what I’ve been saying. Please read through this conversation, slowly, and use some of that critical thinking when you do it. After beginning with a fallacy (which is very non-critical-thinking of you), you very specifically claimed, “They’re not getting worse, Christians are just enjoying less of a benefit...” I’m telling you you’re wrong about that, and that it is in fact getting worse. How bad or good it is compared to another group is irrelevant, as I already explained to you when correcting your fallacy. So these females, blacks, and toasters that you bring up don’t support your claim in the least. But even if they could, I will inform you female and Black Americans are very, very well protected against this sort of thing, not only through law-suits, but through affirmative action as well. Toasters, unfortunately, have very few rights and are probably one of the most oppressed groups of Americans out there. Regardless, these things remain irrelevant. I will also explain to you, once again, that something doesn't need to be legal for it to happen. Welcome to real life. That fact that it is happening is the problem, even if it is technically illegal.
#95 - Then make that argument, rather than the fallacy that was your…  [+] (10 new replies) 10/24/2014 on Why, Why -1
User avatar #96 - nigeltheoutlaw (10/24/2014) [-]
>i can get fired for bringing my bible to work.

I won't dismiss this one outright as long as you can show me where in the U.S. legal code there are special allowances made for discrimination against Christians.

>People stealing nativity scenes

Anecdotal. You can take any group of people and make them seem oppressed with a new story or two, so this one is out.

>houston mayor wants to regulate sermons

This is being litigated right now, so until there is a decision made it is a moot point.

"Massive hate" is entirely subjective, and it being okay to make fun of Christians in media and pop culture is as well. If humor is hostile and hate then FJ must fucking hate everyone that isn't a WASP.
User avatar #98 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
Also, the P in WASP stands for protestant, which is a kind of Christian. This post in itself disproves that point.
User avatar #97 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
>I won't dismiss this one outright as long as you can show me where in the U.S. legal code there are special allowances made for discrimination against Christians.

Just because something isn't technically legal doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Also, that's not how law works. There doesn't have to be a law allowing something for it to be legal. There just has to not be a law forbidding it.

>Anecdotal. You can take any group of people and make them seem oppressed with a new story or two, so this one is out.

Not just a story or two man. It's been happening more and more often, so much so that a company has actually started offering GPS trackers to churches in case their scene, or specifically the Jesus figurine, are stolen.

>This is being litigated right now, so until there is a decision made it is a moot point.

The fact that it is being pressed to happen, has public support, and is even being debated is a point in itself. If there were a law being discussed to regulate sermons for other religions, there would be a huge uproar. But you probably didn't even hear about this until this comment thread. It's okay, neither had I. Because apparently it's not worth an uproar if it happens to Christians.

>"Massive hate" is entirely subjective, and it being okay to make fun of Christians in media and pop culture is as well. If humor is hostile and hate then FJ must fucking hate everyone that isn't a WASP.

Subjective =/= irrelevant. And it doesn't have to be subjective. We could sit here and list off all the different movies, tv shows, popular websites, etc. that make fun of Christians and Christianity. That would take forever though, because the amount is very apparently massive. Also, there's a difference between jokes that attack silly stereotypes that nobody actually believes, and making fun actual core beliefs and values and making them seem ridiculous. Additionally, there is a difference between pure humor and satire. Satire is meant to make an actual point.
User avatar #100 - nigeltheoutlaw (10/25/2014) [-]
You're seriously no better than a feminazi. All you do is cherry pick some anecdotal stories to try and justify your self-imposed victimization, regardless of whether or not it's real.
#99 - nigeltheoutlaw (10/25/2014) [-]
And you can also get fired for being a female, or black, or a fucking toaster. That doesn't make it legal. Do you even know what anti-discrimination laws are?

Then link to them. Back it up with some facts, such as a study that is showing a nationwide increase in the thefts.

Okay, I can see now that no matter what is said or how anecdotal your stories are, you're going to insist that everyone in America hates a proper god fearing Christian. Have fun with your delusions, I'm not going to waste another minute attempting to beat some critical thought into you.
User avatar #105 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
You could also just watch some tv or movies once in a while. It's pretty hard to miss usually.
#104 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
User avatar #102 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
I make these arguments, addressing your claims and showing the faults in your counter-arguments. Instead of making new arguments, or arguing for reinforcing your old ones, you instead put words in my mouth, using a straw-man fallacy, comparing me to a feminazi instead of attacking the point (another fallacy, Fallacious Ad hominem), and posting a GIF that really serves no purpose other than to add some passive-aggressive humor against me. Fallacies everywhere. I understand you might not know when to stop, but maybe take a step back and give it some real thought, that maybe Christians, while not being hated by everyone in America, are being hated on more now than they were 10 years ago. This was my point, and this is what you argued not to be true.
User avatar #101 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
Oh my goodness. Ugh. Okay, look at what you’ve been saying and look at what I’ve been saying. Please read through this conversation, slowly, and use some of that critical thinking when you do it. After beginning with a fallacy (which is very non-critical-thinking of you), you very specifically claimed, “They’re not getting worse, Christians are just enjoying less of a benefit...” I’m telling you you’re wrong about that, and that it is in fact getting worse. How bad or good it is compared to another group is irrelevant, as I already explained to you when correcting your fallacy. So these females, blacks, and toasters that you bring up don’t support your claim in the least. But even if they could, I will inform you female and Black Americans are very, very well protected against this sort of thing, not only through law-suits, but through affirmative action as well. Toasters, unfortunately, have very few rights and are probably one of the most oppressed groups of Americans out there. Regardless, these things remain irrelevant. I will also explain to you, once again, that something doesn't need to be legal for it to happen. Welcome to real life. That fact that it is happening is the problem, even if it is technically illegal.
#92 - >Things are getting worse for A >"B has it wors…  [+] (12 new replies) 10/24/2014 on Why, Why 0
User avatar #94 - nigeltheoutlaw (10/24/2014) [-]
They're not getting worse, Christians are just enjoying less of a benefit of being the great majority. I'm sorry that you can't put up religious decorations on secular government land anymore (although Christians still get away with it frequently in smaller cities and towns). Neither can anyone else, so cry me a fucking river.
User avatar #95 - usafperson (10/24/2014) [-]
Then make that argument, rather than the fallacy that was your last comment.
Also, you only addressed one small issue that cheezbrgr brought up, and you make a good point.
But you fail to address
>i can get fired for bringing my bible to work.
>people stealing nativity scenes.
>houston mayor wants to regulate sermons.
along with the massive hate and that fact that it's perfectly okay to make fun of Christianity to no end in media and pop culture. This very content is an example of it. It stereotypes Christians with a straw-man, makes fun of them, and calls Christians narrow-minded, bigoted, etc. While -most- Christians still do believe that acts of homosexuality is a sin, they still love all sinners and want God to forgive them, accepting them into eternal life, as opposed to "condemning a whole subset of people to Hell."
User avatar #96 - nigeltheoutlaw (10/24/2014) [-]
>i can get fired for bringing my bible to work.

I won't dismiss this one outright as long as you can show me where in the U.S. legal code there are special allowances made for discrimination against Christians.

>People stealing nativity scenes

Anecdotal. You can take any group of people and make them seem oppressed with a new story or two, so this one is out.

>houston mayor wants to regulate sermons

This is being litigated right now, so until there is a decision made it is a moot point.

"Massive hate" is entirely subjective, and it being okay to make fun of Christians in media and pop culture is as well. If humor is hostile and hate then FJ must fucking hate everyone that isn't a WASP.
User avatar #98 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
Also, the P in WASP stands for protestant, which is a kind of Christian. This post in itself disproves that point.
User avatar #97 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
>I won't dismiss this one outright as long as you can show me where in the U.S. legal code there are special allowances made for discrimination against Christians.

Just because something isn't technically legal doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Also, that's not how law works. There doesn't have to be a law allowing something for it to be legal. There just has to not be a law forbidding it.

>Anecdotal. You can take any group of people and make them seem oppressed with a new story or two, so this one is out.

Not just a story or two man. It's been happening more and more often, so much so that a company has actually started offering GPS trackers to churches in case their scene, or specifically the Jesus figurine, are stolen.

>This is being litigated right now, so until there is a decision made it is a moot point.

The fact that it is being pressed to happen, has public support, and is even being debated is a point in itself. If there were a law being discussed to regulate sermons for other religions, there would be a huge uproar. But you probably didn't even hear about this until this comment thread. It's okay, neither had I. Because apparently it's not worth an uproar if it happens to Christians.

>"Massive hate" is entirely subjective, and it being okay to make fun of Christians in media and pop culture is as well. If humor is hostile and hate then FJ must fucking hate everyone that isn't a WASP.

Subjective =/= irrelevant. And it doesn't have to be subjective. We could sit here and list off all the different movies, tv shows, popular websites, etc. that make fun of Christians and Christianity. That would take forever though, because the amount is very apparently massive. Also, there's a difference between jokes that attack silly stereotypes that nobody actually believes, and making fun actual core beliefs and values and making them seem ridiculous. Additionally, there is a difference between pure humor and satire. Satire is meant to make an actual point.
User avatar #100 - nigeltheoutlaw (10/25/2014) [-]
You're seriously no better than a feminazi. All you do is cherry pick some anecdotal stories to try and justify your self-imposed victimization, regardless of whether or not it's real.
#99 - nigeltheoutlaw (10/25/2014) [-]
And you can also get fired for being a female, or black, or a fucking toaster. That doesn't make it legal. Do you even know what anti-discrimination laws are?

Then link to them. Back it up with some facts, such as a study that is showing a nationwide increase in the thefts.

Okay, I can see now that no matter what is said or how anecdotal your stories are, you're going to insist that everyone in America hates a proper god fearing Christian. Have fun with your delusions, I'm not going to waste another minute attempting to beat some critical thought into you.
User avatar #105 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
You could also just watch some tv or movies once in a while. It's pretty hard to miss usually.
#104 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
User avatar #102 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
I make these arguments, addressing your claims and showing the faults in your counter-arguments. Instead of making new arguments, or arguing for reinforcing your old ones, you instead put words in my mouth, using a straw-man fallacy, comparing me to a feminazi instead of attacking the point (another fallacy, Fallacious Ad hominem), and posting a GIF that really serves no purpose other than to add some passive-aggressive humor against me. Fallacies everywhere. I understand you might not know when to stop, but maybe take a step back and give it some real thought, that maybe Christians, while not being hated by everyone in America, are being hated on more now than they were 10 years ago. This was my point, and this is what you argued not to be true.
User avatar #101 - usafperson (10/25/2014) [-]
Oh my goodness. Ugh. Okay, look at what you’ve been saying and look at what I’ve been saying. Please read through this conversation, slowly, and use some of that critical thinking when you do it. After beginning with a fallacy (which is very non-critical-thinking of you), you very specifically claimed, “They’re not getting worse, Christians are just enjoying less of a benefit...” I’m telling you you’re wrong about that, and that it is in fact getting worse. How bad or good it is compared to another group is irrelevant, as I already explained to you when correcting your fallacy. So these females, blacks, and toasters that you bring up don’t support your claim in the least. But even if they could, I will inform you female and Black Americans are very, very well protected against this sort of thing, not only through law-suits, but through affirmative action as well. Toasters, unfortunately, have very few rights and are probably one of the most oppressed groups of Americans out there. Regardless, these things remain irrelevant. I will also explain to you, once again, that something doesn't need to be legal for it to happen. Welcome to real life. That fact that it is happening is the problem, even if it is technically illegal.
#18 - Fun fact to add to all this: The big bang theory was made by a…  [+] (1 new reply) 10/23/2014 on Why, Why +5
User avatar #28 - meltdownlol (10/23/2014) [-]
The catholics invented alot.
#16 - yes 10/23/2014 on Why, Why +4
#39 - No, feminism isn't why the legal system is ****** … 10/19/2014 on Feminism's Effect +6
[ 296 Total ]

items

Total unique items point value: 2050 / Total items point value: 2250
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#10 - datgrass (06/25/2014) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #8 - physicsamurai (09/28/2012) [-]
Thank you.
User avatar #9 to #8 - usafperson (10/01/2012) [-]
You're welcome bro. I feel for you. Let me know how it works out.
#6 - anonexplains (05/18/2012) [-]
retard
User avatar #1 - jmezfm (04/07/2012) [-]
Why the add?
User avatar #2 to #1 - usafperson (04/07/2012) [-]
no reason, just thought i would add a a random person as a friend, clicked your username, saw you said you accept requests, added, you accepted, we are here. How do you do?

User avatar #3 to #2 - jmezfm (04/07/2012) [-]
Haha awesome. And I do fine, and yourself?
User avatar #4 to #3 - usafperson (04/07/2012) [-]
quite fine myself, thank you
#5 to #4 - jmezfm (04/07/2012) [-]
This image has expired
You're very welcome, fine sir.
 Friends (0)