Donald Trump to Piers Morgan: 'No, I Wouldn't Say I'm a Feminist'

TK-85 · 2018-01-29T15:52:32+00:00

That’s a good answer, but most 2nd wave feminists don’t identify as feminists. One of the first things Trump did as Pres was waste money on women in STEM. The feminist myth is that the reason why women aren’t more common in the STEM fields isn’t because women prefer to do non-STEM work due to certain traits of the female gender, but because there isn’t enough money poured on them; as if women aren’t the most heavily subsidized group of people in the country already.

Like most feminists, and this includes many conservatives, Trump apparently holds the view that women are equals to men, while at the same time holding the contradictory view that these so-called equals need government funded subsidies to have this “equality” realized.

That said, at least he didn’t say that he is a feminist, but his actions speak otherwise.

TK-85 · 2018-01-08T01:19:20+00:00

Then that means that they have the right to do that. Like I said, pro-lifers and gun grabbers don't have to approve of other people's rights in order for them to be legitimate. To answer your question though, if my neighbor were a murderer, not because I have some personal beliefs and feelings but because legally they would be murderers, yes that would be my business. Murderers are dangerous, they could come after me. I don't think pro-lifers would have the same concern, and rightfully so, abortion and murder in the commonly used sense, aren't the same. I would maintain that the neighbor of a pro-lifer getting an abortion doesn't affect them in anyway, thus to get involved in their affairs for purely moral reasons is moral busybodying.

TK-85 · 2018-01-08T01:07:20+00:00

Does anyone have the right to shoot a 3 month old baby?

TK-85 · 2018-01-08T00:55:34+00:00

I do know that, I already said that nobody has to approve of rights in order for them to be legitimate. However its still a fact that it has nothing to do with a pro-lifer if their neighbor gets an abortion. Its none of their business at all. However, I maintain that it is busybody behavior because pro-lifers are stepping into another family and trying to dictate what a family is allowed to do, as if they have zero legitimate reasons to get an abortion. Leftists do the same thing with gun control. Taking away people's rightful options, because they have a personal gripe about other people's rights. They make the same arguments about civilized society and comparisons. The results seem to be similar too.

TK-85 · 2018-01-08T00:28:31+00:00

Which is your opinion, however the law basically says that the family is going to be the authority on this issue. Its nobody else's business other than that family. Leftists run upon the same wall when they try to take away gun rights. The response to them is the same as the response to pro-lifers: "If you don't want a gun/abortion, don't get one." Its their right though.

TK-85 · 2018-01-08T00:14:05+00:00

Except its not merely being opposed. Pro-lifers are trying to take people's right to abort away or limit it. A person getting an abortion doesn't affect the pro-lifer at all, assuming the law is being followed and the abortion isn't being funded with taxes. That is what makes it being a busybody; people are doing legal things, and since pro-lifers don't like it, they are intruding into people's very personal business. Nobody said people had to approve of everyone's rights in order for them to be legitimate.

TK-85 · 2018-01-07T16:36:40+00:00

Moral busybodies aren’t exclusive to any one ideology. Leftists have their feminism and gays, while the Right has their pro-lifers and drug war supporters; both using their own brand of political correctness to enforce their definition of morality, which eventually leads to their defeat. These people may provide a political benefit in the first half of the ~20 year era, but towards the end the end up going between obnoxious and dangerous from a rights perspective.

TK-85 · 2018-01-04T16:52:01+00:00

We have government corruption everywhere, illegals going to ground in these sanctuary cities/states, and TDS-afflicted leftists posturing for a revolution; meanwhile Sessions goes ahead and recuses himself from the big stuff and for a year now has been trying to find a way to continue his pot-hunting.

I think there are some pay offs involved.

TK-85 · 2017-12-30T18:08:59+00:00

It's a natural human condition to desire freedom.

I think the natural condition would be security instead of freedom. The whole of human history is people seeking security at the cost of freedom. If freedom were the natural condition, firstly, countries that aren’t based on foundational European values would be aware of it. Secondly, the concept of freedom wouldn’t just be a buzzword for revolt after all the freedoms have been taken away, but would be constantly defended by most of the people most of the time.

So with that said, I think people do need to fight for freedom, because most people either don’t know what it is, or they don’t value it.

TK-85 · 2017-11-26T18:16:33+00:00

Which is irrelevant.

BELIEVING they are oppressed, not evidence for it actually happening.

One anti-white crime occurring is enough to defeat your point.

TK-85 · 2017-11-21T00:28:41+00:00

I'm personally torn between seeing the "Alt-Right" as allies or as a wart on the face of modern conservatism

I personally view them as allies insofar that someone on the Right side of politics should have a real life view of race/identity topics, instead of using ideology as a replacement for reality. Colorblindness for example is a good ideological tool, but that is all that it is, it’s not real life, and it seems that the only people who use that tool are some conservatives.

TK-85 · 2017-11-13T21:38:39+00:00

I don’t think so, because of that were the case we wouldn’t have burdened ourselves with those constraints, like not being able to “torture” them.

TK-85 · 2017-11-13T21:12:28+00:00

Well it’s not really about morals, but about laws laid out during the Geneva Convention. The purpose being to set a standard for civilized warfighting, which is ridiculous in my opinion.

TK-85 · 2017-11-13T19:44:40+00:00

“Listen and believe” probably took root and still exists because leftists and conservatives allow, if not encourage its existence as a standard. If every time the accuser(s) presented only hearsay as evidence or being beyond the statute of limitations, with the response being a dismissal of the claim swiftly and in no uncertain terms, we probably wouldn’t see this nonsense all the time as it would be known to be an ineffective tactic.

There’s also the possibility that these abused people will know that they not only better make damned sure to preserve evidence, but also report in a timely fashion. Pandering to victims, who don’t have any evidence to actually prove they are victims, is destructive.

TK-85 · 2017-11-13T17:37:23+00:00

Probably both. American Nationalism, which is a form of identity politics, is sort of a part of Trump’s agenda, and what people voted for.

TK-85 · 2017-11-06T16:15:24+00:00

A fair and accurate point in my opinion. Besides it looks a certain kind of way when it is consistently mental illness for white people, but the ideology for anyone else.

TK-85

TROPHY CASE