You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
4

[–] ardvarcus 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

When I see two fags on television sticking their tongues down each other's throats, I have to turn my head away or close my eyes. It makes my physically ill. My stomach does a backflip. It's like smelling a dead animal on the side of the road. And the Jews who run the media shove this in our faces again and again and again and again with the intention of desensitizing us to this perversion. And maybe it works for fools, but it doesn't work with me.

0
3

[–] SmokeyMeadow 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

A faggot will tell you that this natural, ingrained reaction (which probably developed as an evolutionary response) is horrible. What a ridiculous age we live in. We're led to believe that the unnatural is natural, and vise versa. This is constantly reinforced in our media. Square pegs are routinely pounded into round holes, with the accompanying exclamation that "square pegs can be round, too!" Everything wrong is right, and everything Right is wrong.

What I find funny is that the fags who push this crap will cringe just as hard at an anigif of a squirting vagina. Pictures of squirty vaginas are like kryptonite to faggots. And if you talked to these gays, they would make no secret about the fact that they find female anatomy to be disgusting. No one calls them bigots for that. "Tolerance for me but not for thee," pretty standard play by the insane Left.

0
1

[–] Chimaira92 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

"Tolerance for me but not for thee," pretty standard play by the insane Left.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

Philosopher Karl Popper defined the paradox in 1945 in The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

"Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant."


Homophily and intolerance

The relation between homophily (a preference for interacting with those with similar traits) and intolerance is manifested when a tolerant person is faced with the dilemma of choosing between establishing a positive relationship with a tolerant individual of a dissimilar group, or establishing a positive relationship with an intolerant in-group member. In the first case, the intolerant in-group member disapproves the established link with an other-group individual, leading necessarily to a negative relationship with his tolerant equal; while in the second case, the negative relationship toward the other-group individual is endorsed by the intolerant in-group member and promotes a positive relationship between them.

This dilemma has been considered by Aguiar and Parravano in Tolerating the Intolerant: Homophily, Intolerance, and Segregation in Social Balanced Networks,[11] modeling a community of individuals whose relationships are governed by a modified form of the Heider balance theory.[12][13]

Karl Popper

Karl Popper was born in Vienna (then in Austria-Hungary) in 1902 to upper middle-class parents. All of Popper's grandparents were Jewish, but they were not devout and as part of the cultural assimilation process the Popper family converted to Lutheranism before he was born[17][18] and so he received a Lutheran baptism.[19][20] His father Simon Siegmund Carl Popper was a lawyer from Bohemia and a doctor of law at the Vienna University while his mother Jenny Schiff was of Silesian and Hungarian descent. Popper's uncle was the Austrian philosopher Josef Popper-Lynkeus. After establishing themselves in Vienna, the Poppers made a rapid social climb in Viennese society as Popper's father became a partner in the law firm of Vienna's liberal mayor Raimund Grübl and after Grübl's death in 1898 took over the business. Popper received his middle name after Raimund Grübl.[17] (Popper himself in his autobiography erroneously recalls that Grübl's first name was Carl).[21] His father was a bibliophile who had 12,000–14,000 volumes in his personal library[22] and took an interest in philosophy, the classics, and social and political issues.[13] Popper inherited both the library and the disposition from him.[23] Later, he would describe the atmosphere of his upbringing as having been "decidedly bookish."[13]

Popper left school at the age of 16 and attended lectures in mathematics, physics, philosophy, psychology and the history of music as a guest student at the University of Vienna. In 1919, Popper became attracted by Marxism and subsequently joined the Association of Socialist School Students.[13] He also became a member of the Social Democratic Workers' Party of Austria, which was at that time a party that fully adopted the Marxist ideology