what about the other woody? mia too having peanuts in hiding and not walking tall?
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
An open letter to fellow Christians
- Thread starter Confuseous
- Start date
what about the other woody? mia too having peanuts in hiding and not walking tall?
erection2015
Alfrescian (InfP) + C
my apologies sir that my post was not very apparent....the fault is mine....i had meant the sinkie woody being mia.
what about the other woody? mia too having peanuts in hiding and not walking tall?
as i said earlier, "disgust" is a subjective emotion. how can a subjective emotion be used as a basis for deciding objective moral norms? maybe we should ban durians too since many ang mohs are disgusted by its smell and taste.
http://www.salon.com/2011/07/24/disgust_interview/
Daniel Kelly, an assistant professor of philosophy at Purdue University, explains in his new book, “Yuck!: The Nature and Moral Significance of Disgust,”
Q: Can disgust be dangerous?
It’s an indisputable fact at this point that disgust influences a lot of social and moral judgments in a variety of ways. An interesting question is whether or not feelings of disgust should play a part in deliberate decision making. If a large percentage of the population finds some social practice disgusting — like stem cell research or cloning — is that a good reason to think the practice is immoral? I argue that it should not. A practice people are disgusted by may or may not be immoral, but the fact that people are disgusted by it is totally irrelevant to that particular question. We shouldn’t trust disgust to give us reliable information about morality. We know the story of how it evolved and why it varies from one culture to the next. Investing the emotion with moral authority is extremely dubious, and we shouldn’t uncritically trust it.
Q: Does disgust play a role in creating social inequality? So gays and lesbians shouldn’t be denied the right to marry on the grounds that their so-called disgusting lifestyle undermines the sanctity of marriage?
The groups that are most likely to elicit disgust are often the lowest on the social hierarchy. Women have been made into objects of disgust a lot throughout history. Disgust can be a very powerful rhetorical tool to discredit, undermine or demonize an opponent or a group of people with whom you don’t agree. An easy way to do those things is to portray someone as infecting the integrity of your own social group. Disgust is a really potent emotion, and using it can be pretty rousing and effective because it has an almost subliminal influence on how we think of things.
Q: Why not use it to make discrimination unfashionable?
I argue against disgust ever being used as a social tool, even to get rid of something we all logically agree is morally pernicious. It’s easy to imagine someone arguing that, since rational and calculated arguments haven’t done a lot to change public opinion about racism, maybe we should try portraying racism and racists as disgusting. The powerful influence of this emotion might help push racism to the edge of society or eliminate it altogether, but my response is that we still shouldn’t do it. It’s not ethically appropriate to deliberately depict any group of people as disgusting because disgust makes it very easy to dehumanize, and that would do the very thing we seek to undo.
My ang moh friend is disgusted by my love for durians. He says it looks like shit, smells like shit and tastes like shit. Should we ban durians?
if i can't read then you dun even have the capacity to think.
can convert means no more, 0%?????
you which school 1???????????????????????????
again i am not asking about what the law says.
if you spineless to even state your stand then you dun need to reply anymore to embarrass yourself further.
ban durian, by all means in angmoh land.
bump up thread to award points 
erection2015
Alfrescian (InfP) + C
sir...you rate a reward...it will arrive in due course.
bump up thread to award points
Surely you must know that there are more than these two 1989 & 1994 studies. No? Despite the attempts by faggots in coming up with all manner of excuses, the fact is that all these studies consistently demonstrate faggots to be extremely promiscuous.
Faggots spreading AIDS amongst themselves does not bother me. I am of the view that it is nature's way of wiping them out.
That's the ultimate aim of LBG faggots in Singapore, to be able to marry and adopt children. It won't happen. The more faggots try to push the boundaries of decency, the more there will be a pushback. If they persist, they will pay an extremely heavy price for trying to corrupt our children and trying to shove their faggotism and debauchery down the throats of Singaporeans.
Again, my advice to you LBG faggots is to please keep all your buttfucking and faggotism private and in your personal bedrooms. Don't bring it into the public arena.
Similar threads
