Conquer Club

riskllama wrote:if you are in the scouts, karel, you are much too young for SRS...

whatever

karel wrote:

riskllama wrote:if you are in the scouts, karel, you are much too young for SRS...

whatever

llamsagna would know, karel.

warmonger1981 wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Did you read the article about Rex Tillerson? Worth a read if you haven't:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/16/rex-tillerson-at-the-breaking-point

You're a fucking retard. You belong in California catching a disease.

Bit harsh- it's a good piece of long form journalism. Might be a bit heavy for you though.

hotfire wrote:In this thread:
Misogyny and the fear of change attack practicality. Again.

Where was there a misogynistic post?

-TG

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:

hotfire wrote:In this thread:
Misogyny and the fear of change attack practicality. Again.

Where was there a misogynistic post?

-TG

There wasn't one yet. I was expecting one at the time.

mrswdk wrote:Now both girls and boys are free to learn essential skills such as whittling and bushcraft.

Is bushcraft where the kids learn about landscaping 'down there'?

Symmetry wrote:

warmonger1981 wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Did you read the article about Rex Tillerson? Worth a read if you haven't:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/16/rex-tillerson-at-the-breaking-point

You're a fucking retard. You belong in California catching a disease.

Bit harsh- it's a good piece of long form journalism. Might be a bit heavy for you though.

First of all the article has nothing to do with OP. So stop the derail and trolling. Secondly I've read far more boring books such as " Report of the Commission on the Social Studies Conclusions and Recommendations of the Commission". It's a free PDF for download. Or " Foundations: Their Power and Influence. Maybe the "Nag Hammadi Scriptures". Maybe "Morals and Dogma. Here a classic " Philosophy of History by G.W.F Hegel. So something from the New Yorker is blatantly one sided and opinionated.

still a good article, tho. i liked it very much. a little out of place, yes - i would agree.

riskllama wrote:still a good article, tho. i liked it very much. a little out of place, yes - i would agree.

Informative.....Yes. All information is but was a deliberate attempt at derail.

warmonger1981 wrote:

riskllama wrote:still a good article, tho. i liked it very much. a little out of place, yes - i would agree.

Informative.....Yes. All information is but was a deliberate attempt at derail.

Nah- read the article- you'll see how it's related.

Phatscotty wrote:I was crazy for arguing this point and so many others that have come to pass, and so soon too eh? Everybody at the times said this would never happen because of redefining marriage. I know, no big deal right? But from never happen to no big deal.... Yeah okay let's just pretend everything is still normal!!
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/u ... girls.html

Let me get this straight...you believe that the decision by the Boy Scouts to allow girls to join their membership is because of redefining marriage?

How do you logically parse that belief?

The 'Rex Tillerson is fed up' meme is so July.

Bentelbow wrote:

mrswdk wrote:Now both girls and boys are free to learn essential skills such as whittling and bushcraft.

Is bushcraft where the kids learn about landscaping 'down there'?

Hopefully. Don't want those little lasses developing any bad habits that will follow them in to later life.

Woodruff wrote: Let me get this straight...you believe that the decision by the Boy Scouts to allow girls to join their membership is because of redefining marriage?
How do you logically parse that belief?

That's obvious. They are both acts inspired by the militantly political drive to destroy age-old, biologically functional societal standards of gender and sexuality. Whatever the new snowflakes want to outlaw, ban, censor, marry, eroticize/neuter, surgically or hormonally rearrange, etc. etc. will be the new law ... until they very quickly drive themselves extinct.
You see, ai will do a much more efficient job of being a sexless, non-organic tyrant than any of the 'persons', no matter how nebulously they are defined.

Thorthoth wrote:

Woodruff wrote: Let me get this straight...you believe that the decision by the Boy Scouts to allow girls to join their membership is because of redefining marriage?
How do you logically parse that belief?

That's obvious. They are both acts inspired by the militantly political drive to destroy age-old, biologically functional societal standards of gender and sexuality. Whatever the new snowflakes want to outlaw, ban, censor, marry, eroticize/neuter, surgically or hormonally rearrange, etc. etc. will be the new law ... until they very quickly drive themselves extinct.
You see, ai will do a much more efficient job of being a sexless, non-organic tyrant than any of the 'persons', no matter how nebulously they are defined.

It's fascinating how the snowflakes of the world, such as yourself, like to project things onto other people. Folks like you are the snowflakiest of flakes.

Plus he looks rediculas in that hat.

Woodruff wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I was crazy for arguing this point and so many others that have come to pass, and so soon too eh? Everybody at the times said this would never happen because of redefining marriage. I know, no big deal right? But from never happen to no big deal.... Yeah okay let's just pretend everything is still normal!!
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/u ... girls.html

Let me get this straight...you believe that the decision by the Boy Scouts to allow girls to join their membership is because of redefining marriage?

How do you logically parse that belief?

Extremely simply Woody. Gay marriage was a statement that sex does not matter. Boy scouts allow girls, because sex doesn't matter. I was able to Prometheus all this by understanding the issue accurately in its absolute entirety. Again, simply put, how could the BOY scouts possibly exist if sex doesn't matter.

As I employed it in the dead on balls accurate kind of way, LOGIC = the Scouts of America.

I'm handing out gender neutral pronouns for Halloween. You might want to skip my house.

I don't believe sex was ever supposed to matter to a Boy Scout. They teach a lot of different skills, but lovecraft has never been on the list. If someone is learning Whittling or Apple Planting, I can't see that sex would have any relevance whatsoever. Before or after your epiphanous moment.

Dukasaur wrote:I don't believe sex was ever supposed to matter to a Boy Scout. They teach a lot of different skills, but lovecraft has never been on the list.

Yeah, that was more of an 'unwritten' rule.

Civilization needs to return to the dark ages. Obviously, it is being blinded by the light.

The Boss or Manfred Mann?

Thorthoth wrote:Civilization needs to return to the dark ages. Obviously, it is being blinded by the light.

Yemen is calling you. Book a flight.

If there had been girls in the boy scouts when i was a kid, i sure would ve liked to stay longer. Did it for like 6 month and it bored me. This and all the stupid religious stuff.

betiko wrote:If there had been girls in the boy scouts when i was a kid, i sure would ve liked to stay longer.

Not if you'd seen the types of girl that are interested in joining the Scouts.

mrswdk wrote:

betiko wrote:If there had been girls in the boy scouts when i was a kid, i sure would ve liked to stay longer.

Not if you'd seen the types of girl that are interested in joining the Scouts.

Exactly! The new gruff and burly female boy scouts will cause a snowball effect that will attract more and more, butch, semi-transgendered, separatist lesbians into the boy scouts. Eventually they will vote to outlaw boys from the scouts, due to their 'toxic oppressive male energy'' (and I quote!)

Has nobody ever heard of the narrow end of the wedge?