People should be allowed to do whatever they want so long as it doesn't harm anyone

Why is this even debated? If two dudes want to suck each other's dicks, if someone wants to smoke a bowl in their own home, who the fuck cares? Why should their freedoms be curtailed just because you think it's "degenerate"?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Ruf_phAz1hQ
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_integrity_identity_disorder
pickeringpost.com/story/the-cost-of-islamic-incest/1316
nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizofrenie
youtu.be/3DLXqHucIzo
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>All is permitted
Leave this place, hedonist filth

>Anon5
not surprised

>doing drugs doesnt harm anyone
you are a fucking retard holy shit if your family memeber is on drugs not only does it hurt them but it hurts the family as well

not an argument

its not that they do it its that they are so in your face about it, never keep it confined to their own home and except no critisism whatsoever.

they should have the freedom to indirectly harm themselves if that's what they choose. as long as it doesn't directly harm other people

No

why should we?

>you should be allowed to fuck dead bodies
dude that's ficking gross

So if they weren't "in your face" you'd find it permissible? interesting...

literal non-arguments

good post OP

if they are european then their neighbours will have to pay for their healthcare as a result of drug use if they are american their own family will have to which means drug use not only is self harm and a form of semi suicide but it also harms those around you if you cant understand that its because you are stupid the argument " it doesnt harm anyone but me" is just plain idiotic and wrong

Their souls are in danger of perdition. Where did you go to church that you don't understand that?

You can harm your society without harming a particular individual.

Agreed, but Sup Forums don't know what to do with their anger so they take it on degenerate and mudslims

I can shit on the floor in my own house. It doesn't mean that it's a good thing. It doesn't mean that there aren't consequences. It doesn't mean that if society sees this they ought to accept it.
Youre free to conduct yourself how you wish, there's just consequence to your action.

in the case of more than one person, two consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever they want. again, so long as there is no direct harm to either or any third party. low energy shilling

>doing drugs doesnt harm anybody
are you retarded? you obvously never seen a junkie before.
also having socialism and full freedom are 2 things that dont mix.
why should i the tax payer be paying for some lazy degenarate fatfuck who cant take care of his own health?

how do you define what is "good"?

You hear that? It's going off every second. Every second that passes you get one second closer to dieing. Jews invented relativity. We ban time altering drugs but not clocks themselves? You're idiotic and wrong

see
you seem agitated that your worldview is being questioned, shill

>Homosexuality is a mortal sin against God
I don't want anyone to burn in hell user

>Drug traffickers are direct causes or murder, torture, and rape while peddling brain debilitating drugs
It's not just about pot, dude

Yes, lasting consequences enforced by a rabid and diluted public, hell bent on ruining your life, career and family, propagated by a vast, state controlled media, to sway public opinion towards demonizing you for shitting on your floor.
Are those the consequences you are referring to, or is that just your ideal fantasy?

>Why is this even debated?
It's not debated, all "arguments" against it are shitposts either on forums or IRL.

>time altering drugs

>two consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever they want.

so you are advocating for things like bugspreading? and cannibalism witch does harm the people doing it. and whos paying for that? the normal taxpayer pay for your own degenarate fetishes freak.

and if the society was not based on socialism? this is a hypothetical scenario/society. people should be allowed to do what they want, with no harm or other tax imposed on those that do not partake

>Why is this even debated?

Because not everyone is a post modernist and/or moral relativist.
Thank God.

It isn't about what one person defines as good, it's a collective effort. Those ideas of what is right and wrong are collated and in theory represented in the nations laws.
Collectively as societies we have deemed some substances too detrimental for recreational use, some acts too hazardous for safety, some practices immoral (according to the general sentiment).
Deal with it faggot.

I used to think like you until recently when I realized that this is a slippery slope.
You open the door to accepting some degeneracy and then you have people in the video below who advocate for adults to have sex with children.
Exactly where is the line drawn?
youtube.com/watch?v=Ruf_phAz1hQ

>cannibalism
i never mentioned any such thing.
>witch does harm the people doing it
your reading comprehension is off, shill

If muslims pray in the streets it doesn't harm me but it annoys me. Why should i tolerate this ? I don't think people must be allowed to do whatever they want.

there's no such thing as any action that doesn't some other non-consenting party, unless you use mental gymnastics to gerrymander the landscape of possible actions. unless you literally live alone in the extreme reaches of some wilderness, you're going to get entangled in other people's lives. a physical boundary like a property doesn't change that, because what you do at home changes you, and then what you do in society changes the lives of others.

Not advocating the act itself. Rather, the freedom to do such things, as long as everyone involved is doing so by their own free will.
What do you mean when you say "who's paying for that?" Are you referring to the health care aspect?

> society was not based on socialism?

every "first" world country has some form of cancerous socialism.

and no should you be allowed to kill youself or practice self harm?
there is a point where freedom stops and mental illnes/ madness begins.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_integrity_identity_disorder

just a couple of examples

you also have to include harm to society itself.
if is serous enough.
Its "THE COST OF ISLAMIC INCEST"
pickeringpost.com/story/the-cost-of-islamic-incest/1316

PEOPLE ARE WHO THEY ARE BASED ON WHAT THEY ARE EXPOSED TO AND THE GAYS ARE FUCKED UP

>Why should their freedoms be curtailed just because you think it's "degenerate"?
Why should my freedom to gas you be curtailed because of your made up rights?

Because everything that people do in a specific society, changes that society, aswell as that society's associated Culture.

Biggest example of this is Japan. I don't even need to explain.

What you end up with is an inappropriate, degenerate semi-sex culture that messes up thought depending on what is happening.
Women do not "DESU DESU ONII-CHAN".

awesome idea, why don't we take away fags healthcare when their lifestyle hurts my wallet when they get aids.

yes also cannibalism is a serous mental illnes its not to be joked with.
> shill
to buthurt to reply with an actual argument?

Huh, I guess means that the government should be able to dictate my whole life and any actions that I take.

>there is a point where freedom stops and mental illnes/ madness begins.
What if every one of your own personal thoughts categorized you as a nutcase by the standards of the state? What if those standards change from minute to minute as "new science" discovers a million and one new categories and qualifications for mental illness.
What does mental illness have to do with freedom?
Are you suggesting people with depression shouldn't be allowed basic rights?

why even have a goverment to dictate laws? become an ancap and you will be able to do whatever you want without those pesk laws getting in the way right?

the only way to change the social compact is through the amendment process. two thirds of the states banned gay marriage, but because of one judge the entire country has gay marriage. that's why I care. because I like the constitution.

i replied to your lack of reading comprehension shill
seems you've still not learned your lesson. i specifically said any act that does not do direct harm to the person or third party. stop bringing acts of violence to this discussion

Good luck doing something without offending someone

What consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedroom doesn't seem to matter in the beginning, sure.
But then they commune with other degenerates and form their own communities. Then they screech and cry about oppression and try to normalize their mental illness to society at large. Then that mental illness spreads, now that there aren't taboos against it. A breakdown of taboos leads to a breakdown of the family unit, which is what civilizations are built upon.

Lefties and libs are concurrently trying to kill traditional families and build their own out of their carcasses. They think they inherently know better than the lessons that took us millennia to establish just because a German Jew named ___ Marx told them so. They are wrong. All commies need to hang.

> depression shouldn't be allowed basic rights?

if you are a danger to youself then is when the coo coo van should pick you up.
a good example would agian be.
nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizofrenie
so youre not advocating for cannibalism and incest?
or are you one of those anarchyfags?

stop imposing your moral standards on me, its hurting me.

/thread

I'll agree on this if food stamps and any aid whatsoever depends on drug test

i am not an anarchist. i do not advocate for cannibalism or any other form of violence

"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law"

i find it quite ironic that faggots went screaming and kicking to daddy goverment as soon as some chrisfag baker did not want to bake them a cake but thats just irony huh?

you always say that the gov should interver with your rights but as soon as sombody does something the fags dont like the go crying to big daddy goverment for help.

Ban all forms of aid. If someone on welfare gets hurt when they're all fucked up do they go on disability or workers comp? Disband the government. Kill the educated. No more elites.
youtu.be/3DLXqHucIzo

alright it seems we have some found common ground to agree on.

but what about the things that hurt society itself like exstreme hedonism and the destruction of the nuclear family?

yet you impose moral standards against those you deem partake in "degenerate" acts. interesting

this.

these are the only sensible norms and values we should live by.

Should two homos suck each others dicks in front of everyone, in public, in front of a school full of children? I mean, they aren't harming anyone right? People can just look away right?

No one is an island, some moral standards have to be upheld.

stop skipping my points

>but what about the things that hurt society itself like exstreme hedonism and the destruction of the nuclear family
you will have to back up those assertions

>if you are a danger to youself then is when the coo coo van should pick you up.
What if the definition of 'crazy' suddenly includes you, for reasons obscure and convoluted?
>so youre not advocating for cannibalism and incest?
No, but I am advocating for the freedom to do them.

>Then they screech and cry about oppression and try to normalize their mental illness to society at large. Then that mental illness spreads
And everyone is perfectly capable of forming their own opinions about these matters, and choose to agree or disagree with them.
Are you suggesting that people aren't capable of making up their own minds, or that humanity is a Malleable chunk of clay, destined to be molded by some outside force?
If so, what is that force, if not other people?

What if two dudes want to suck each other's dicks in the ladies room? Are you ok with that, so long as they both identify as women at the moment?

Thats because there's no such thing as individuality and that everything anyone does effects other people which makes a ripple throughout the greater creature of human society that we're a part of

>If it doesn't directly affect me, then it's okay.

If you want to live in society, you should follow the traditions. If want to be truly free, you need to leave society

What about convincing people to hurt each other or themselves?

Free speech or terrorism?

are you suggesting that a society can choose its ideology as men choose their clothes? that morality is entirely relative to different "collectives"? do you believe there is a natural law?

Because you have the terrible idea that the individual is the building block of society. This is horribly wrong. The building block of society is the nuclear family, and that is susceptible to retardation of the sort you are for.

Because it doesn't work like that. If it did then no one would give a fuck, but we're talking about Leftism. If no one had a problem with what Leftists want then they would have to invent new issues. That's the real problem with Leftism, it revolves entirely around fixing issues and because of it it has no end goal. In 30 years time, when they've got their open borders, they'll start crying how they're nationalists now and how the races should be segregated. Just like the niggers did at Mizzou. Appeasing a Leftist is like appeasing a Jew. It will never end well for you.

A person is responsible for all the harm they bring on themselves. If i pound a nail through my hand, why should someone else be responsible?

You say own home , yet people can't keep it there. You keep your degeneracy to yourself, don't wear it as a badge of "pride"

Spoken like a true collectivist. It must suck for you to live in a country founded on individual liberties.

The reason why we make rules is to institute a sembalance of moral code in the general population. The reason we need to do this is because otherwise, the only thing that is "bad," or "unlawful," or "wrong" is the vague and highly subjective act of "harming " someone, as you've said.

Does the definition of harm mean physical, emotional, mental, financial, territorial, or all of the above? "Harm" is a subjective spectrum. For some people, things that you would consider definitely unacceptable fall into their own "socially acceptable" category. How do you keep the peace in this case? How, without rules, can you ensure that an individual, in their own day to day life, may successfully judge what is harmful or not harmful to others in their decision making?
If a citizen is capable of moral judgement that is in agreement with his fellow citizens, as a group, they can successfully keep the population GENERALLY happy and healthy, and also ensure that Justice is maintained more adequately with the needs of the group. The rules enables strong centers of group trust, and from this, enable prosperity and development.
When we focus on laws that control the content of people's lives, we have a problem. In general, however, social structure and the "rules" that necessarily come of it, is inherently helpful to the maintainence and development of healthy communities and thereby happy lives. (:

>Because you have the terrible idea that the individual is the building block of society. This is horribly wrong. The building block of society is the nuclear family,
What do you base this on?

I think the way that our societies work is democratic.
>Natural Law
we're above that aren't we?

>No, but I am advocating for the freedom to do them.
no mate incest is proven scientifically o be a nation destroyer lowering iq and causing birth defects.
just look at the islamic world for proof of what cousen marrieges do to genarations of people.

>What if the definition of 'crazy' suddenly includes you, for reasons obscure and convoluted?
crazy is very well difined mate
things like exstreme self harm shizofrenia and hallucinations voices in your head are just a couple.

atleast your willing to descuss most freedom fags if spoken too are rabit zealots.

also heres a qeoustion what makes you assume the will do there act at home?

I don't care if people use drugs I just don't want to see or hear about people using drugs

You'd be surprised what a person is capable of doing when they have nothing left to do but follow orders.

If you wanted to get married but the only jewelry store in town wouldn't sell you a ring because you pick your nose wouldn't that make you mad

the black community is a good example of what happens when you destroy the nuclear family.

ill post a couple of citations in my next post.

fuck off ancap. society is valuable and humans have purpose and utility

call your parents and tell them you love them then stop being such a degenerate

...

they use the jewdiciary to get their way. that's why my country is so fucked up today. they've been doing this shit for a century, and legal positivism (social justice) has become the mainstream in our courts.

she t h i n k

Im not making any judgments I'm just saying that's how things are. I think that people should be able to do what they wan't within reason. Real life is a very subjective thing.

>no mate incest is proven scientifically o be a nation destroyer lowering iq and causing birth defects.
>just look at the islamic world for proof of what cousen marrieges do to genarations of people.
I have no intention of refuting these facts. They are facts. Question is, how do they effect me if i don't engage in them?
>crazy is very well difined mate
Not in the least. New disorders are invented all the time.
>also heres a qeoustion what makes you assume the will do there act at home?
Doing the act in public subjects them to public scrutiny.

The last 4000 years of human development, and the greatest empires in history. Family life is essential to humanity, without a strong nuclear family, you get generations of listless, lost people. Kinda like today.
Individual men certainly do direct the fate of nations, but those nations are made of the bricks of family.

What about Pedophilia?

I don't disagree, though that still doesn't exclude them from responsibility. If I'm hungry enough to steel food, i still committed a crime.

its a private busness mate the can do what the want;)
also consider this you follow a religious law and a faggot knows you folow that law but he still tries to force you to bake the fucking cake.
and goes crying to daddy goverment to force you to bake it for him even do you dont want to that seems like a violation of the freedom to denie service.

the baker did not swear a baking oath to serve everybody so he can denie service.

so if the demography of these democratic societies were to shift to the extent of being majoraly leftist and they then impose their ideas, all is well because it is democracy at work?

yup. and it was jewish communists that convinced them to march. it was kike Freud that started attacking the traditional family--telling us they we all want to bang our moms and that's why we're so fucked up.

The freedom to choose obviously exists, don't be daft. People can choose right and they can choose wrong. What you're really advocating for is the destruction of civilization under the guise of "muh freedoms."

All leftists need to hang.

>Family life is essential to humanity, without a strong nuclear family, you get generations of listless, lost people. Kinda like today.
Agreed, but without individuality, that family structure is a barren mother.

Civilization is based off of the nuclear family. Without it, there can be no consistent propagation nor development.

...

>how do they effect me if i don't engage in them?

they destroy society to sub digit iq. (arab country's) and cause horrible birth defects that agian the taxpayer would have to pay for.

Equal accountability I suppose.

Free speech can be dangerous under certain circumstances.

Just saying.

>What you're really advocating for is the destruction of civilization under the guise of "muh freedoms."
I'm not advocating any such thing.
Western civilization should be seen as a pillar for greatness.

>then impose their ideas
if their ideas are subversive to the social compact, then they are tyrants. even if they have good intentions.