Current Events > Never be afraid to stand up for social justice.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Never cringe from it. Never be embarrassed about it. Stand up for people's dignity, respect, and civil rights. It's the surest way to make the world a better place.

social justice is mr satan being friends with buu
---

RESIST

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIpkdusnIkE
---

Remember if you stand up, conservatives will ridicule you for being an SJW and you'll probably become a meme.
---

Blue_Dream87 posted...

Remember if you stand up, conservatives will ridicule you for being an SJW and you'll probably become a meme.

Don't care. There's nothing shameful or embarrassing about standing up for what's right. The shameful thing is to stay silent.

Bump. =)

I stand up to social justice
---

Kaname_Madoka posted...

social justice is mr satan being friends with buu

---

Is this a joke account?

Someone's gotta stand up now that hill dogs gone


---

SSJ-Spiderman posted...

Is this a joke account?

No, Glass_Phantom just can't risk everyone on CE forgetting that he's the most righteous guy on here.
---

frozenshock posted...

I stand up to social justice

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmfRMeU6pQ8
---

Capn Circus posted...

RESIST

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIpkdusnIkE

The contrast between those girls in attractiveness is absolutely astounding.
---

I agree with the TC.

SJWs going on idiotic rants is what put Trump in the White House, Republican majority in the senate, Republican majority in the House, a Christian conservative in the Supreme Court, and a Republican win in every single special election this year.

Keep screaming nonsense, SJWs! You're making the world a better place!
---

Glass_Phantom posted...

Never cringe from it. Never be embarrassed about it. Stand up for people's dignity, respect, and civil rights. It's the surest way to make the world a better place.

Honestly, a lot of 'social justice' isn't improving the world at all. It just annoys people and hides the reality of the situation.
---

Knowledge_King posted...

Honestly, a lot of 'social justice' isn't improving the world at all. It just annoys people and hides the reality of the situation.

Maybe it's true you actually feel that way. But "it just annoys people" suggests to me there's a peer pressure element involved. Standing up for what's right hasn't always been popular, at various times it's been very UNpopular. But we should stand up for what's right anyway. Seems to me a lot of people stopped standing up for things when it became uncool to do so, when the default meme became to post Trigglypuff or w/e. That isn't cool, and those people aren't cool for doing it. Nor is making racist jokes cool, nor is being "redpilled." We aren't hiding the reality of any situation by propping up stereotypes.

You say that social justice is "right", but I fail to see what's so virtuous about putting feelings before facts, about violently silencing people you disagree with, about pushing a postmodern narrative in schools instead of a narrative based on empirical evidence, about defending Islam and Sharia, about advocating for Marxism, about repeating debunked myths like the wage gap, about demanding taxpayers pay for prisoners' sex changes.....

Need more examples of how social "justice" is the modern-day ideological equivalent of ass cancer?
---

Sephiroth1288 posted...

You say that social justice is "right", but I fail to see what's so virtuous about putting feelings before facts, about violently silencing people you disagree with, about pushing a postmodern narrative in schools instead of a narrative based on empirical evidence, about defending Islam and Sharia, about advocating for Marxism, about repeating debunked myths like the wage gap, about demanding taxpayers pay for prisoners' sex changes.....

I don't put feelings before facts. I only don't confuse facts with stereotypes, then rely on those stereotypes to form an opinion of millions if not billions of people.

I don't silence people I disagree with. I only reprimand people for spreading hate.

I don't even know what "spreading a postmodern narrative in schools instead of empirical evidence" means. Sounds like buzzwords.

I don't defend the most radical interpretations of Islam. I think those interpretations and the human rights they abrogate are evil. I only recognize Islam is a religion which is capable of being exploited for good or for bad, just like Christianity, and not everyone follows the same restrictive teachings. I refuse to group together all Muslims according to the most brutal and orthodox among them, and I refuse to essentialize everything that's wrong with the Islamic world as being caused by religion and culture when dictatorship and war have more to do with it. We must treat one another as individuals and show love to one another.

I don't advocate for Marxism, but I advocate for a system where we pay enough into the system to help support each other and are proud to do it.

I don't want women to make more money than men, but I do recognize there is a gender pay gap in this country resulting from the disparate careers men and women choose, and I think that ought to be put right by fixing misogynistic workplace cultures and making sure women aren't discriminated against for having children.

Glass_Phantom posted...

I don't put feelings before facts. I only don't confuse facts with stereotypes, then rely on those stereotypes to form an opinion of millions if not billions of people.

It is politically incorrect to say that Muslims are overrepresented in terrorism stats, but it's still a fact. No, that doesn't imply all Muslims are terrorists, but it does imply that Islam is destructive in a way Christianity and Judaism are not.

I don't silence people I disagree with. I only reprimand people for spreading hate.

Do you equate "spreading hate" with violence? Have you not seen so many other "SJWs" call hate speech a form of assault, and therefore it is justified to respond to it with physical assault?

I don't even know what "spreading a postmodern narrative in schools instead of empirical evidence" means. Sounds like buzzwords.

Postmodernism in a nutshell the idea that all opinions can be valid because there are an infinite number of ways to interpret the world. It's basically the cornerstone of leftist thought, and why they are so quick to reject empirical evidence.

I don't defend the most radical interpretations of Islam. I think those interpretations and the human rights they abrogate are evil. I only recognize Islam is a religion which is capable of being exploited for good or for bad, just like Christianity, and not everyone follows the same restrictive teachings.

But the majority of muslims have radical interpretations of Islam

I don't advocate for Marxism, but I advocate for a system where we pay enough into the system to help support each other and are proud to do it.

Even though there's an inverse relation between government spending and economic growth?

I don't want women to make more money than men, but I do recognize there is a gender pay gap in this country resulting from the disparate careers men and women choose, and I think that ought to be put right by fixing misogynistic workplace cultures and making sure women aren't discriminated against for having children.

Except the reason men and women choose to do different jobs is because of inherent psychology, not society.

Do you think the reason the prison population is 90% male is because our court system is sexist against men?
---

"Standing up for what's right."

This is the core of the problem. Someone's idea of "what's right" might be absolutely ridiculous in some cases, but that won't stop that person from shoving it down everyone else's throat and shaming them for not feeling the same way.

But hey, keep standing up for what's right, and make sure to be as loud and abrasive about it as possible.

Very nice graphic. I love how it takes the "Red Letter Media" approach by being so huge and formidable-looking that psychologically, it almost places itself above refutation. (I think human minds are conditioned to be easily-spooked by things that are big and imposing like that.)

It's also very difficult to respond to point-by-point, since there are so very many points, and the doing so would be so very long and painstaking. Therefore I edited your graphic a little to remove everything that's useless. I hope you don't mind.



My rebuttal is: yes, there are a lot of Muslims in the world that have beliefs I think are wrongheaded. Some of them are even beliefs I consider to be evil. I won't be drawn into the mistake of laying everything that's wrong in the Islamic world at the feet of Islam, though, when it simply isn't true.

Where is your blame for the Cold War? For the Soviet Union, which invaded in places like Afghanistan and leveled cities, slaughtered entire generations of people? Where is your blame for the United States, which supported religious fanatics like the Mujaheddin and allowed them to spread their perverse ideology thither and yon, displacing everyone who was level-headed? Where is your blame for dictatorship? For kings and despots who kept their people in chains, prevented them from ever knowing freedom and opportunity?

Is sectarianism "Islamic culture," or is it a power structure that arises in countries whose borders were drawn artificially from the ruins of the Ottoman Empire, whose people lack citizenship, and thus are easily turned against each other by dictators who exploit fear of the minority to keep the majority on their side? Are revenge killings "Islamic culture," or are they what happen in societies with no faith in due process and rule of law? Is religious extremism "Islamic culture," or is the glue that holds fundamentalist governments together, which those governments, their kings and ayatollahs are manufacturing and disseminating to keep the people in line?

People are people. Muslims are not more likely to be evil on account of their religion; we can see that here in the United States, where Muslims tend to be a lot more liberal. No, they're made to be more evil on account of their circumstance. Folks like you will never admit that though, because just as the dictator in Tehran stands to gain politically by manufacturing hatred towards heretics and apostates, you stand to gain politically by manufacturing hatred towards Muslims. It allows you to create an incentive for "protecting" your countrymen and members of your ethnicity from outsiders, which you parlay into votes and political support. Your ways aren't very much different.

On the other stuff: I won't be drawn into a point-by-point back-and-forth encompassing half a dozen different subjects. This one was long enough.

Boombam99 posted...

This is the core of the problem. Someone's idea of "what's right" might be absolutely ridiculous in some cases, but that won't stop that person from shoving it down everyone else's throat and shaming them for not feeling the same way.

My idea of what's right isn't any more ridiculous than Martin Luther's idea of what was right when he nailed the theses on the door of the church, or Mary Wollstonecraft's when she wrote her Vindication, or Rosa Parks' when she refused to give up her seat. Social change and history both are made by people advocating for what is right, and standing up against what is wrong. I won't shame you, but I'll kindly invite you to join me in fighting for it.

Whether you're defending civil rights or human rights or basic human dignity, don't ever be embarrassed. It doesn't matter whether you're speaking for someone who is trans or Muslim. There's no contradiction there; don't ever let them tell you there is. And don't ever be afraid to speak up and speak out for other human beings. We're all God's children.

Glass_Phantom posted...

Very nice graphic. I love how it takes the "Red Letter Media" approach by being so huge and formidable-looking that psychologically, it almost places itself above refutation. (I think human minds are conditioned to be easily-spooked by things that are big and imposing like that.)

Lol. You are actually contending that I have given you too much evidence that I am correct.

I think you need to have a long, serious think about the implications of your automatic rejection of factual data.

It's also very difficult to respond to point-by-point, since there are so very many points, and the doing so would be so very long and painstaking. Therefore I edited your graphic a little to remove everything that's useless. I hope you don't mind.

Do you have any fucking idea what Sharia is and what it entails? Do you actually see no issue with imposing theocratic laws onto a country?

Ironically enough, you probably shit yourself when Christians in the US try to force creationism into science classes. Well, imagine that, but also pushing for executing homosexuals, women who commit adultery, and anyone who apostates from Islam. Now you would be getting an idea of what Sharia law looks like.

My rebuttal is: yes, there are a lot of Muslims in the world that have beliefs I think are wrongheaded. Some of them are even beliefs I consider to be evil. I won't be drawn into the mistake of laying everything that's wrong in the Islamic world at the feet of Islam, though, when it simply isn't true.

Uh, I'm pretty sure Islam is the source of everything wrong with Islam.

It's kind of an elementary association.

People are people. Muslims are not more likely to be evil on account of their religion; we can see that here in the United States, where Muslims tend to be a lot more liberal. No, they're made to be more evil on account of their circumstance. Folks like you will never admit that though, because just as the dictator in Tehran stands to gain politically by manufacturing hatred towards heretics and apostates, you stand to gain politically by manufacturing hatred towards Muslims. It allows you to create an incentive for "protecting" your countrymen and members of your ethnicity from outsiders, which you parlay into votes and political support. Your ways aren't very much different.

It's really amusing that someone who claims to be on the side of "social justice" is telling me that I stand to gain political power by admonishing a religion that preaches for hatred against Jews, women, homosexuals, and anyone who refuses to follow their bronze-age theocratic doctrine.

And the fact that you can't see the irony there is depressingly hilarious.
---

CrimsonRage posted...

frozenshock posted...

I stand up to social justice

"I stand up to being a decent human being."

Fight the good fight, brother.

Decent human beings don't condone institutional racism just because the target of said institutional racism happens to be white people. Just an FYI
---

-Gavirulax- posted...

lol pretty much.
Almost every single bad experience I had as a child I can blame on Islam (and why I'm now an anti-theist, although inspired by Hitchens), not to excuse Christianity (which my mother is) or any other religion, but it's clearly the biggest issue for modern religion.

I won't try to invalidate your experiences. Just as there are Christians who can be overly-dogmatic to the point of hatred and violence, the same goes for Muslims. I don't speak in favor of oppression, only in defense of innocent people who are persecuted, killed, and discriminated against on account of their religion. The path to tolerance within Islam doesn't begin with persecuting Muslims.

It's really amusing that someone who claims to be on the side of "social justice" is telling me that I stand to gain political power by admonishing a religion that preaches for hatred against Jews, women, homosexuals, and anyone who refuses to follow their bronze-age theocratic doctrine.

Who preaches hatred against Jews, women, and homosexuals? "The religion?"

And who controls the religion in the Middle East?

The autocrats of the Middle East control the religion. The dictator in Tehran, and the dictator in Saudi Arabia. The Middle East is rife with dictatorships. Do you really think anything is said or done in those countries without the head of the snake sanctioning it? That is how a dictatorship works.

And what does the dictator stand to gain by allowing such hatred to be preached? It keeps the people divided, fighting amongst themselves instead of fighting against the snake who lords over them. And it keeps the people united against their religious enemies: Shia against Sunni, Sunni against Shia, Sunni against Kurd.

@-Gavirulax- Btw, I'd love to talk to you some more and pick your brain. Don't know if we'll ever come around to each other's way of thinking but I could at least learn more from and about you.

Glass_Phantom posted...

Who preaches hatred against Jews, women, and homosexuals? "The religion?"

Yes.

And who controls the religion in the Middle East?

People who study the Quran and requisite Hadith

The autocrats of the Middle East control the religion. The dictator in Tehran, and the dictator in Saudi Arabia. The Middle East is rife with dictatorships. Do you really think anything is said or done in those countries without the head of the snake sanctioning it? That is how a dictatorship works.

And as it turns out, it's real easy to get people to submit to a dictatorship when there's a theocratic dogma you can impose on the masses with little to no resistance.

And what does the dictator stand to gain by allowing such hatred to be preached? It keeps the people divided, fighting amongst themselves instead of fighting against the snake who lords over them.

Right, because the middle east way more chaotic when Hussein and Gaddafi were in power</sarcasm>

Civil wars, I'd imagine, are bad for any ruler regardless how evil they are.
---

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Right, there was way less terrorism going on while Hussein and Gaddafi were in power.

The oppression of Gaddafi and al-Assad triggered popular revolts. Terrorists were able to sow their seeds in the intervening chaos while the cowardly West refused to commit peacekeepers. Dictatorship is not a sustaining model for the Middle East. It's also not a moral or ethical model. Telling Muslims, "You are a savage, primitive people, and therefore you will be forced to live in a dictatorship without any hope" is a big part of the reason why Muslims hate the West and are motivated to commit terrorism, religion aside. Terrorism is about a lot more than religion, its also about identity. People become radicalized if they feel persecuted.

Sorry, our laws don't end where your feelings begin.
---

Never be afraid to stand up for social justice... as you sit on your ass and do nothing more than ridicule people online for not being as virtuous as you.
---

The Admiral posted...

Never be afraid to stand up for social justice... as you sit on your ass and do nothing more than ridicule people online for not being as virtuous as you.

I won't question your authority on that subject. =)

Glass_Phantom posted...

The oppression of Gaddafi and al-Assad triggered popular revolts. Terrorists were able to sow their seeds in the intervening chaos while the cowardly West refused to commit peacekeepers. Dictatorship is not a sustaining model for the Middle East. It's also not a moral or ethical model. Telling Muslims, "You are a savage, primitive people, and therefore you will be forced to live in a dictatorship without any hope" is a big part of the reason why Muslims hate the West and are motivated to commit terrorism, religion aside. Terrorism is about a lot more than religion, its also about identity. People become radicalized if they feel persecuted.

I do not say that muslims are savage, primitive people.

I do say that Islam is a savage, primitive religion that pushes savage, primitive doctrines. There are good muslims, of course, but these people are good in spite of Islam, not because of Islam.
---

voldothegr8 posted...

Sorry, our laws don't end where your feelings begin.

This.

My freedoms don't end where your feelings begin.

You say that, and I think you're very much mistaken. You've mixed up the cause with the effect, and as a result, you're seemingly willing to condone the horrific abuses of dictators in order to guarantee "peace." As Harrison Ford said, real peace isn't the absence of conflict, it's the presence of justice -- and there's no justice to be had under tyranny. Advocating for Muslims to be kept under the boot of a tyrant because you think their culture/religion is "savage" and they need to be kept in line is unethical, immoral, sinful, imperialistic, un-American, and just plain bad policy. It isn't a sustainable model. Look at the Arab Spring. Dictatorship is the cause of the uptick in terrorism. People would not turn to organizations like ISIS if they did not feel persecuted; would not engage in so much violence if they did not feel oppressed.

-Gavirulax- posted...

Specifically, Mohammad, the founder of the religion (via proxy of a made up friend he created based on plagiarizing previous religions), you know the "perfect" man according to Islam.
An illiterate, moronic, psychopathic warlord with likely schizophrenia who wants everyone to submit to a supernatural celestial dictatorship filled with contradictions, lies and fairy tales.

@-Gaviruluax- What good's it do to say such things? I can grasp why an ex-Muslim who was ostracized by his family for being gay would revolt against Islam and its prophet -- but what good, really, does it do? Perhaps you'll convince some other adherents to abandon the religion and join you in atheism or agnosticism, and some of those people may be happier for it. But there are other, better ways you could do it without insulting the holiest of the holy for over a billion people. Muhammad is dead. He has been dead for well over a millennium. Whatever he did or didn't do, it's irrelevant now. The Koran lives on. In my opinion, the way to changing the people's hearts isn't by insulting their prophet, but by showing them what it means to live in a place where there is justice, education, and mutual respect for people's rights. That is what is missing from the lives of so many who hail from the Middle East. It seems to me that insulting Muhammad serves no positive purpose, except perhaps to give the Muslims who ostracized you the middle finger, which might bring you some satisfaction -- but at the cost of handing a bludgeon to far-right anti-Muslim extremists, who will take this talking point and use it to defame all Muslims as savages, which is precisely what you're playing into.

Glass_Phantom posted...

-Gavirulax- posted...

Specifically, Mohammad, the founder of the religion (via proxy of a made up friend he created based on plagiarizing previous religions), you know the "perfect" man according to Islam.
An illiterate, moronic, psychopathic warlord with likely schizophrenia who wants everyone to submit to a supernatural celestial dictatorship filled with contradictions, lies and fairy tales.

@-Gaviruluax- What good's it do to say such things? I can grasp why an ex-Muslim who was ostracized by his family for being gay would revolt against Islam and its prophet -- but what good, really, does it do? Perhaps you'll convince some other adherents to abandon the religion and join you in atheism or agnosticism, and some of those people may be happier for it. But there are other, better ways you could do it without insulting the holiest of the holy for over a billion people. Muhammad is dead. He has been dead for well over a millennium. Whatever he did or didn't do, it's irrelevant now. The Koran lives on. In my opinion, the way to changing the people's hearts isn't by insulting their prophet, but by showing them what it means to live in a place where there is justice, education, and mutual respect for people's rights. That is what is missing from the lives of so many who hail from the Middle East. It seems to me that insulting Muhammad serves no positive purpose, except perhaps to give the Muslims who ostracized you the middle finger, which might bring you some satisfaction -- but at the cost of handing a bludgeon to far-right anti-Muslim extremists, who will take this talking point and use it to defame all Muslims as savages, which is precisely what you're playing into.

Iran had that when it was emulating America, but the religion still won and took over.

I'm all for the world being better but like hell I'd ever associate my thoughts or feelings as "social justice" and prefer to stay away from that term and its "warriors" like the fucking plague.

If I ever do right by this world, it'll be on my own terms and through personal volition, SJW-ism will have nothing to do with it motive-wise and sure as shit won't get any credit.
---

Glass_Phantom posted...

You say that, and I think you're very much mistaken. You've mixed up the cause with the effect, and as a result, you're seemingly willing to condone the horrific abuses of dictators in order to guarantee "peace."

Look how you're trying to change the subject. You probably aren't even aware of it yourself because of how subtle it is, but it's interesting how your defense mechanisms are so dishonest.

You made the claim that dictators in the middle east want their people at odds with each other so that they would be less inclined to fight the real enemy, the dictator themself.

But only an absolute fool would look at the before and after today and conclude that there was less infighting in countries during the dictators' reigns.

Of all the issues I brought up in my first post, you chose to only argue the Muslim point and ignore all the others, presumably because you thought this would be the one you could win an argument on. I'd really hate to see how misinformed you are on all those other things if that's the case.
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXF8MIG_HQI
---

Inferno Dive Dragoon posted...

I'm all for the world being better but like hell I'd ever associate my thoughts or feelings as "social justice" and prefer to stay away from that term and its "warriors" like the fucking plague.

If I ever do right by this world, it'll be on my own terms and through personal volition, SJW-ism will have nothing to do with it motive-wise and sure as shit won't get any credit.

Actual social justice is a good thing. People who try to make a real difference by joining organizations like the Innocence Project or various charities to improve education in poor neighborhoods should be lauded.

However, just making petty comments online to make yourself feel superior -- which is all pretty much every "social justice activist" on this board does -- is worse than useless. This is why these people are rightfully mocked as bitter losers.
---

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DF8bKttWAAA3dRs.jpg

This is a flier that Antifa has been spreading around. This is not a joke, parody, satire, or "troll". Antifa legitimately believe this. They believe that the only course of action now is violent revolution and the mass slaughter of innocent people. Not just people but children and I know of at least 3 people on this site who will defend them.

This is what social justice warriorism breeds. It's a mish mash of ideologies that produces some of the most racist, sexist, most bigoted people you will ever meet and it's not just against white people and men.

My god the shit these people will say about women and black people who don't agree with them and yet there are people on this site who will defend them and hail them as champions of "social justice". It's sad, it's pathetic, and it's about time these people woke up and start seeing these sjw, intersectional feminist, blm, antifa types for who they really are.

These people are monsters and you don't have to be one of them.
---

SSJ-Spiderman posted...

voldothegr8 posted...

Sorry, our laws don't end where your feelings begin.

This.

My freedoms don't end where your feelings begin.