User Controls
Posts by Zanick
-
2018-04-07 at 7:35 PM UTC in My 200th threadI want to thank my love slave, Lanny, all of my fans, my parents, and, last but not least, the shitposters - infinitygay (Illiterāte scholar) and speedy loser - who perhaps singularly fuel my thread creation despite their insistence that I not.
-
2018-04-07 at 7:32 PM UTC in THIS SHITPOST BROUGHT TO YOU BY...I came to say the above, but now I'm MAD you little kike, get lost before I phone in a tip to a three letter agency about the exotic cat for whom you have no permit
-
2018-04-07 at 7:17 AM UTC in I've successfully discouraged Zanick from making new threads.I actually post threads in batches. I have a Word document with about forty loaded at the moment. You'll be seeing them before the weekend is over.
-
2018-04-07 at 7:08 AM UTC in My hilarious jokes thread calm downWhat's the difference between a trustworthy jedi and a unicorn?
I wouldn't know, I've never met any. -
2018-04-06 at 11:40 PM UTC in Current watch?What features on the Pebble were you using most frequently?
Personally, I use a Fitbit because it was a gift, but it has made a difference in my fitness. If you aren't looking for that functionality, what else do you typically value in a wristwatch? -
2018-04-06 at 11:37 PM UTC in The Retardest Thread: Fashionably Late Edition.I hope he's having a fabulous trip. I hope he never sees this post, but I like Narc. He's funny and clever, and I think he's handsome too, even though I've never seen what he looks like. Absolutely beautiful cock. I've got a laminated copy on my wall ever since he first posted it.
-
2018-04-06 at 11:35 PM UTC in What do you think of me?I think you're a strong, sensitive, sexy young man who shouldn't settle for second-best. You are the King of Kink, and no one else will do.
-
2018-04-06 at 11:33 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
Originally posted by GasTheKikesRaceWarNow You're not even an anti-semite, and you're not prepared to become one. The woke world consists solely of jedis and anti-semites. There is nothing outside those intellectual spheres.
I can appreciate even the most hardened examples of racial hatred in media. Over the Summer, I almost bought a porcelain lawn jockey that looked like it dates back to Jim Crow just for the historical value. I spent it on drugs instead, but that racist statue would have been a great conversation starter in my living room. -
2018-04-06 at 11:31 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meatIf it suits me you will be hearing from me soon VERY LOUDLY COMMENDING your choice of television
-
2018-04-06 at 11:29 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meatAlright, I do have an HBO subscription, and from your assessment, it seems possible that I've failed to grasp the point. I'll give it another try.
-
2018-04-06 at 11:11 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
Originally posted by GasTheKikesRaceWarNow YES! Law derives ultimately from an aesthetic.
People feel like something is icky and wrong. It might be murder, fraud or even something like homosexuality or bestiality. They get some nerd interning for a politician to sit down and write something formal sounding prohibiting it, then a bunch of people who didn't read what a nerd wrote vote on it. That is literally how law is created, and always has been.
Even though I know you to be wrong, this vision of how legislation is passed somehow rings far closer to reality than the truth.You probably think you're a master debater getting into all your sophistry, but I have read this entire thread, and not once have you or Lanny made me feel anything at all. Nasim Taleb(probably another Lanny alt) at least posted videos and showed how the future could be better. That sorta made me feel something. Your tactic is dry argumentation - you're aiming for a "gotcha" that makes your opponent say "wow, you really caught me in that rhetorical trap, first proposed by Aristophanes of Arsophenesus in 1258 BC, therefore you win and I lose. I will now become vegan".
TLDR: your argumentation has zero emotional impact - and we're talking about killing and eating the body of furry little creatures.
Hardly a master debater at all, and I wasn't attempting a pathos argument. Though I must admit, I do like your prose. Have I seen you before with another handle that I'd recognize? All of that aside, I didn't see a direct criticism of my argument in your post other than that it doesn't make you feel anything. I wouldn't measure the success of my argument by what it makes you feel, because I'd rather not guess about your capacity for feeling in the first place given that I only know you as "GasTheKikesRaceWarNow".When you become more cynical you might. It pre-requires a jaded mindset.
I've tried. I'm plenty cynical, I just don't care for his character. It lacks the subtlety of Seinfeld, and I don't care for the writing. Perhaps it's unfair of me to compare it to its predecessor. I don't know, it just doesn't grab my attention. Do you know of an episode that might change my mind? -
2018-04-06 at 10:28 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
Originally posted by GasTheKikesRaceWarNow Besides you sounding like a corporate lawyer arguing some finer point in patent law, did you read the articles? Personally I am shocked that I have basically no duty to help people in trouble.
Reminds me of the great Seinfeld clip:
Larry David is a genius, and completely unafraid of punching sideways - making fun of his fellow jedis - which is what makes his shows so uniquely watchable even for someone like me.
How would you have me discuss the law, as an artist?
I said that many countries have such laws, not that all countries have them or that they're perfectly enforced in the countries that do. You're right, in the US (depending on what state) you don't necessarily have a legal obligation to help someone in danger, but many other countries have passed legislation which obligates their citizens to intervene, and the argument that leads to the passing of this legislation is invariably an appeal to natural rights. Thus, we have a moral obligation to help people who are in danger.
This obligation is magnified when we have also brought about the danger in question. What does that say of our duty to animals in our meatpacking industry? I think you know the answer.
Also, I agree about Larry David - clearly a genius of comedy. Still, I don't care for Curb Your Enthusiasm. -
2018-04-06 at 9:36 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
Originally posted by benny vader the jury shall note that he said this, but offered no proof whatsoever to ….
Obbe and I have been more casual about whether to include sources, and have foregone them for most of our discussion, but I'm happy to point you or him in the direction of Wikipedia articles pertaining to the subject.
Basically, there are two kinds of laws that I've found material to our discussion which encourage people to save someone who needs help: there are 'duty to rescue' measures which most often means that failure to lend assistance to someone in need can open you up to litigation, while 'good samaritan' laws are more familiar in the US and offer protection from liability to people who incur liability in the course of lending aid, say, crack a person's rib while performing CPR. Such laws are intended to either penalize people to do nothing and to eliminate the deterrent of a lawsuit for would-be rescuers.
As you'll see in the articles below, between these two legal concepts, there are many countries which have adopted them as law in some form.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law
That these concepts are found in so many places suggests to me that there is an expectation that we help a person whose well-being is compromised, if we are able to. Based on some of the cases cited in the 'duty to rescue' article, I would think that someone who is directly responsible for creating the unsafe conditions that threaten another person's well-being has an even greater obligation to intervene. -
2018-04-06 at 6:52 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
Originally posted by Obbe 1) If some people prefer to boycott the meat industry I think that is fine. Nobody has any obligation to do so, but everyone has the ability to do what they believe is right.
2) Everybody has an ability to do what they believe is right but nobody has an obligation to. If someone was murdered right in front of you and instead of doing anything about it you just froze and pissed your pants I wouldn't hold it over your head or make you think you were obligated to do anything about it. It would be ok.
Thanks for replying to my questions, sorry I'm back so late but I wanted to make sure I gave enough time to address this.
1) No, not other people. Since you said that you don't approve of factory farming, I want to know what you believe is right, given that it is your right is to make your preferences known in how you purchase goods. I want to know specifically whether you would boycott an industry that employs business practices that you consider morally repugnant. If you do see a boycott as a legitimate option for you as a consumer, I would argue that the meatpacking industry is an institution worthy of such protest.
2) I understand your point, but you must realize that what you advocate opens you up to certain uncomfortable scenarios wherein you could, for example, watch a child drown and do nothing because you have no explicit obligation to help. Human decency is often observed through the implicit, the personal moral obligations that are incumbent upon us as moral agents. Beyond that, many countries have common law requirements for bystanders to act that would prevent things like this, and I see that as preferable to a society where no individual is expected to lend a hand. -
2018-04-06 at 6:09 PM UTC in I let myself down.Pop an ibuprofen. Brush your teeth. Take a shower. Vomit again. Brush your teeth again to erase the second vomit. Drink more. You'll feel like a new man, I promise.
-
2018-04-06 at 4:14 PM UTC in How do I find some in an office building?We should try to set this user up with Malice.
-
2018-04-06 at 6:20 AM UTC in I'm going to start answering the phone saying "Heil Hitler"If I am what you say I am, do you really think declaring yourself an "unnamed scholar" will protect you from a defamation lawsuit?
-
2018-04-06 at 5:49 AM UTC in My gf broke up with me todayYou ought to hit her, she's got it coming.
-
2018-04-05 at 3:16 PM UTC in Tinder is extremely depressing
Originally posted by Bill Krozby Sometimes it comes up, mainly because why I can't smoke weed or hang out on certain days. And I actually never really hit her, I slapped her a couple times because she slapped me, but I just mainly choked her.
like i've been seeing my gf for a year now and she didn't know about me getting arrested twice for suffocating my ex gf just until last night when we were having an argument and it came up. Don't ask me exactly how it came up but it was relevant at the time.
my side chick that I met when I got out of jail 4 years ago or sold weed and we were real good friends so I was just upfront with her about my situation.
zanick you're kind of a bitchass that obviously doesn't realize being upfront and honest goes a long way in relationships.
plus sometimes I like to test people for the lulz and to pick their brain, a social experiment like enter was talking about except im more real.
I do believe in being upfront in a relationship, but I've never given a girlfriend a beating, so I don't have to be upfront about that. If I were the sort of person who'd do that, it would make the most sense to also lie about it. That's why I don't understand your disclosure: it's not going to sit well with any reasonable girl, and you know she's going to tell her friends. Because telling a woman that you hit women effectively reduces your pool of potential mates for no practical reason, I can only assume you're doing it to relive the thrill of striking women and choking them. -
2018-04-05 at 3:06 PM UTC in Tinder is extremely depressing
