War Room Lounge V44: Backup Whores, or Back Up, Whores?

Have you ever used the services of an escort?


  • Total voters
    43
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dude, I'm talking about a ~7 point drop from an inevitably unpopular war. I think that's a conservative estimate no matter how shit-tier his fan club is.

giphy.gif
 
So I've never used the services of an escort but a while ago while traveling I tried to order some food at what turned out to be a brothel.
 
Last edited:
So I've never used the services of an escort but a while ago while traveling I visited I tried to order some food at what turned out to be a brothel.

So you're telling us you went in for the pie?

{<hhh]
 
Ok let's focus, how do I explain what autism is to someone? I'm trying to explain why an autistic person (a high functioning one) may have had an "violent" episode, but that it wasn't their fault.

This is giving me painful flashbacks to the Steven Crowder change my mind video.
 
And I see this as a baffling disconnect. A fetus is a growing person dependant on a mother to survive. An infant is a growing person dependant on its parents to survive.

A pregnant woman has a baby growing up inside her in the early stages of life. I don't see how a mothers opinion on if she wants a child at that time changes its humanity. Killing a pregnant woman results in two murder charges. Stabbing a pregnant woman in the stomach kills the baby to those parents.

But there are dozens of war room threads for this discussion of where life begins, we don't need to clutter up the lounge

It's a great point that I fail to get my head around.
 
It's a great point that I fail to get my head around.

Where it falls apart is the definition of "need" in this scenario. It's a problem in that we use the same word for multiple degrees of severity for the same thing.

An infant could conceivably live without their parents, say they were raised by wolves. It's a fantastic example, but it could conceivably happen. Where is the mother in the equation? Any caretaker is enough to fulfill the role, the mother is not a critical factor when considering need.

Compare this to a human fetus in the womb. The mother is inextricably linked to the viability of the fetus, at least until the point of fetal viability. A fetus could not survive without the direct consent of the biological mother to continue the pregnancy. Until that viable point, the fetus is an element of the mother, totally dependent on reaching that point in order to survive independently.

This is why pro choice people who are willing to restrict abortion often stop at fetal viability as a red line. Before that, they're completely an element of the mother, completely discrete from even an infant which has autonomy beyond that of leeching nutrients from a host. Babies have an immense amount of independence if you really think about it.
 
Part of the conservative psychology, explicit or not, is that social hierarchies are sacred structures. People at the top of the pyramid are there because they are the most worthy, and vice versa for the people on the bottom. The hierarchy is a source of strength and stability, and to promote equality is to disturb the natural order and embrace chaos. When a conservative says that showing a gay wedding in a cartoon is the end of Western civilization, they are being literal.



Conservatives aren't outwardly pro-abortion towards minorities for a few reasons. First, although they can seem related, its helpful to remember that restricting abortion is more about men controlling women than about the wealthy controlling the poor or the whites controlling the browns. Second, limiting abortion access to everyone is win-win for race conscious pro-lifers. White women will make more white people and minorities will be trapped in an underclass. Third, pointing to disproportionate black abortion statistics is a cynical tactic that conservatives like to employ to try to divide minorities from pro-choice (edit) liberals.



idk what it is, but hardcore conservative Boomer women are legitimately some of the craziest people you will meet out in the wild. Its a strange combination of Evangelical self-righteousness, Anti-science lunacy, Boomer entitlement, and matriarchal anxiety.

One of the best posts I've read all year bro.
 
Tornado warning for Washington DC <{blankeye}>

Is DC known for tornados??

Has anyone actually seen a tornado form? Obviously it's not natural. I mean, I know the establishment will tell you something about pressure or different temperature "air masses" or whatever, but what does that even mean? No one knows! It's just goobledy-gook that the mainstream media tells you so you don't question it. So if They want a tornado in D.C., then a tornado in D.C. there shall be.
 
Has anyone actually seen a tornado form? Obviously it's not natural. I mean, I know the establishment will tell you something about pressure or different temperature "air masses" or whatever, but what does that even mean? No one knows! It's just goobledy-gook that the mainstream media tells you so you don't question it. So if They want a tornado in D.C., then a tornado in D.C. there shall be.
I saw a tornado form over Springfield, MA years ago. The sky went batshit. It was around 4 in the afternoon and the sky was pitch black, lightning and thunder every few seconds, even hail.

edit: video of the tornado
 
One of the best posts I've read all year bro.
Stop drinking so much.

Nah, it was an especially good post (although I don't necessarily agree with using the term "sacred" and think it's more a matter of them considering them natural and merit-based). It should be on @Cubo de Sangre to store all the best WR posts and produce a yearly pamphlet.
 
Has anyone actually seen a tornado form? Obviously it's not natural. I mean, I know the establishment will tell you something about pressure or different temperature "air masses" or whatever, but what does that even mean? No one knows! It's just goobledy-gook that the mainstream media tells you so you don't question it. So if They want a tornado in D.C., then a tornado in D.C. there shall be.
Speaking of shitstorms, is that obnoxious, never-ending story about poop in San Fran based on anything at all? I seem to remember it starting as a story about dog poop near the Golden Gate Bridge, then it morphed into a story about human poop on sidewalks. It seems like a really strange story that is possibly the most awkward, roundabout anti-gay dog-whistle I've ever seen, but thought I'd ask.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top