I'm prejudice but that's because its human nature. I find black women disgusting ugly. But that's just me, I can't see them any other way. Its ugly. I don't like dark tanned women either.

Moron political correctness sjw mongs need to quit labeling preference as racism. I personally find idea of 2 guys rutting gross, heck even Jim carrey puked in his movie after seeing it. Many find it gross, but that's just personal preference.

I won't tell others how to live, but I want to live my way and no sjw PC retard will get me to do otherwise.

Political correctness sjw, want to force everyone into collectivism. That is the sheep herd mentality, unable to think for yourself, everyone copies same morals and ethics and tolerates all.

That is not human

Individualism is human, individual choices, prejudices, morals, ethics and do not tolerate those that try to brainwash you into collectivism.

Even Morgan Freeman recently stated humans are bigoted and must be so its our nature and has allowed our survival and evolution and progress. If we eliminate bigots and force collectivism human progress stops. Evolution ends, no more survival of the fittest, but Mike Judge's idiocracy comes true in a collective political correct society.

Political correct and sjw should be banned and instantly removed for being antihuman, anti freedom and anti individualist. Sjw and PC are true hate groups more lethal and crazier than any fundamental religion.

They are the real terrorists

I understand your discomfort with my phrasing. My beef is with the electoral college system.

While I was getting my degree, I took some really good American History and Government classes at college. The prof in the Govt. class really went into depth explaining the electoral college to us, and to me the shittiness of that system was just shocking. For example: (none of this is news to a truly informed voter or an interested person with an internet connection, but it WAS news to me when I was ~20 years old, and I think it still would be news to a really high percentage of US voters)

* First is the very idea of an electoral college. The only way to become president of the US is to win the most electoral votes. But voters don't cast electoral votes, the people of the electoral college do. OK, the electoral college is supposed to follow the votes/will of their state/constituents (more on that next), but the fact remains that literally/practically, our votes as citizens don't matter. Only the electoral votes count. So yes, in the most literal sense ... NONE of our votes "matter".

* In general, the "electors" (the people on the electoral college) are supposed to cast their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in their state / district. I think 2 states (Nebraska and Maine?) divide up their suggested electoral votes to be as close as possible to the actual proportions of the popular vote, but that's a whole other issue. Anyway, in general the electors are supposed to cast their vote for the popular vote winner in their state. BUT, that process isn't automatic. The votes that actually matter, the electoral votes, are cast by fallible human beings -- and they might "go rogue" and vote against what they are "supposed to" do. That is called a "faithless elector". That would be bad enough if it was just some weird loophole that technically exists but has never actually happened in practice, but actually faithless electors happen fairly frequently. The only upside is that they haven't ever changed the outcome of an election. Yet.

* When we're young and in civics type classes in school, we're brainwashedtaught about Democracy as a very simple, will of the public, one man one vote system. The electoral college shits all over that. One can win the popular vote but lose on electoral votes, and that actually has happened multiple times (not just to Al Gore). In my opinion, the electoral college creates a laundry list of problems (swing states are the only ones that matter, so campaign there and ignore everybody else, etc. etc. etc.), has very few benefits (any supposed benefits of the system are tenuous at best), and is completely contrary to the core concepts of Democracy.


Without the electoral college, a blue vote in Kansas would matter, as would a red vote in Massachusetts. Or a vote for a 3rd party or independent, anywhere. With the electoral college, edge cases like any of those can be safely and easily ignored by candidates.

I think it is unlikely that Kansas would turn blue, even if all of the democrats voted. That being said, we're not a complete LOCK for red; heck, out of the 10 most recent Governors we've had before we turned into Brownbackistan it is an even split between Democrats and Republicans with 5 each. And actually the Democrats had significantly longer total number of years in the office.

So basically, I don't actually think that a vote cast on a losing candidate is "pointless", I just think that the electoral college system does a really good job of making sure that some votes are more pointless than others. It amazes me that there wasn't a MUCH bigger stink made about it when Gore "lost" in 2000, but I guess voter apathy can overcome any challenge to the system.

Not so; the biggest increase is in the secular. One area that remains in the religious majority, however, is the poor, the lost, the desperate and the frightened. But, as education and intellect increases so, too, does the need for answers to serious questions without resorting to myths and brainwashing.

It might "feel" like someone who's found god/religion but that comes down to brainwashing & propaganda. Just like the propaganda that is spread about drugs in general that are scheduled (that they are unhealthy and have no health benefits). The atheist trend is just a trend and everyone is going along with it. I'm not saying I believe in god but that things are a lot more complicated than that.

I commented because it's Richard Dawkins, who in my mind - has a position - one that I had for most of my life in fact. That really there is nothing that can't be explained. Sure, DMT affects the serotonin 5-HTA sites, who cares, It's messing with your brain. So, what? What the person experiences is really the only thing I have ever encountered that truly is a mystery. It opens up that dialog that, really, no one knows what the hell is going on in the Universe if such as strange thing is possible. And in my mind, that is incredible.

Thanks for the insight. That's interesting and hearing stuff like that is helpful.

We always insist that they treat each other appropriately and lay down the law if either one is ever disrespectful or hurtful of the other. That's not to say no brotherly abuse will ever happen, but we are definitely making a concerted effort to provide an environment and also brainwashing to assist in bonding them together and making assaults on one another feel foreign and undesired.

you're right, what the fuck was I thinking, imagining that violating someone's privacy like that is a bad thing. Those feminists have brainwashed me good.

I know exactly what I meant as do plenty of others. Again, a minimum standard of reading comprehension is expected here.

Although this woman was authentically traumatized by the experience of living outside her box, I kind of feel sorry for her. Sorry she is so close minded to living and learning. Sorry she has been brainwashed to the extent that she can't function beyond her religious upbringing. and I feel bad for all those who have to endure her and her beliefs. Her convictions will go on to traumatize her children, and her children's children, and so many more generations to come.

Her physiologic internal belief system will control her until the day she dies, and she will never see any of it from within her bubble. Such a waste of human potential. She obviously has potential for strong convictions, and deep emotion that, I'm sure, could have been put to use in more productive ways in her life.

@enoch

Both @A10anis sentences say roughly the same thing, just poetically phased differently as the 1st focuses on the message, whereas the 2nd on the passing of the message.
Consolidated and rephrased more directly "children should have access to this message/video".

To remove the conflicting poetry and interpret it as intended, re-read it while replacing "brainwashing" with "teaching" and "doctrine" with "message".

did you just advocate indoctrination and brainwashing of children?
trading religious doctrine for secular doctrine?
while one may be more attractive to you than the other..it is STILL:brainwashing and indoctrination!

how about we step away from those practices and instead actually teach children how to utilize information in a positive fashion.give them the techniques to analyze,criticize and formulate their own conclusions?

you know...
the ability to be a free thinker.
how about that?
can we do that?
i think thats a much better idea.

/drops mic
*christ on a stick..brainwashing kids..........cant be serious.....

This simple, but beautiful message transcends race, creed and colour, it should be shown - regularly - to every child on the planet. This form of brainwashing - unlike the religious sort - is a doctrine we should embrace.

I think having a conversation about evolution versus creation can be fruitful. As a former lifelong agnostic who has experienced it, I can testify of the brainwashing that goes on the other side of the fence. It starts out early in childhood books and cartoons, then through public education, television, science fiction and movies. You're raised all of your life to believe the secular creation narrative, and your friends and family who believe as you do reinforce this belief. You are self-deceived into thinking your information filter is very large and sophisticated when it is very small and full of personal bias.

That can be why people have an adverse reaction when evolution is called into question. To them it is reality and if you were to remove that cornerstone their idea of the way the world is would come tumbling down with it. If someone doesn't understand their need for Jesus, it is a hard thing to consider accepting.

Right... thats pretty much how all brainwashing works.

I think it's more like if they would stop redistributing the wealth to themselves from their workers.

If they would stop being greedy f'tards, then more people would have money to buy the things that move the economy and nobody would need government aid in the form of food stamps and welfare (save those who are honestly mentally or physically unable to work).If you want to build an economy the keyword is "build". You don't build a house by building the attic first magically floating there, then the foundation and walls to get up to it, you start with a foundation, then walls. If the people at the bottom have money to do more than barely survive, they buy things that actually move the economy, they buy things at retailers, who need to hire more people; those people buy things which results in transportation and warehouses hiring more people, those people buy things; manufacturing starts hiring (if the rich f'tard didn't send those jobs overseas, which the conservatives blame on the government rather than the rich guy who sent the job overseas for some reason, it's not like the price of that shirt went down when they sent it overseas, they just pocketed the extra wealth for themselves) and those people buy even more expensive things.

Our right wing economy favors investors and large business over the needs of the vast majority. It doesn't matter how much GM stock investors buy and trade, GM won't make more cars and hire more people until enough people can buy cars.

As we slide more and more money from the people who actually spend money in the economy and make it move, to people who just horde and invest, the economy will continue to spiral down. More and more people will require food stamps and welfare due to the actions of the rich, but the conservative right will blame the workers and former workers rather than pushing blame onto the people who are refusing to pay living wages, who push jobs overseas so they can personally pocket more wealth, and complain about the people they aren't giving living wages to and the people they laid off need government assistance, and the conservative voters go right along because the pulpit and Fox News has brainwashed them into believing that a party that disobey's everything their Jesus taught them is the Christian party.

The growing wealth and income gap is the biggest challenge facing our nation, and indeed much of the world. Of course most of the rest of the world does a better job of caring for the work force than the US does, paid maternity leave in all but 4 nations, paid vacation time in most of the world by law, paid sick time in most developed economies, minimum wages tied to inflation in much of those countries, a minimum level of health insurance for every man woman and child without having to buy from for-profit corporations (most actually use a single payer, which sort of ignores the fact that our individual mandate that we have now was invented by the Republican party, and is financed the same way they wanted to do it and the tax penalty for not participating is the same...the other nations that use individual mandates do so via not-for-profit insurance)... We do so much to protect the rich and investor class in this nation... sickening really.

Wow. Just not enough time to read all this.
Let me summarize.
Just because someone is an Atheist, doesn't mean they aren't a dumb as shit brainwashed Libertarian.

Something that struck me while watching:

There are arguably a lot of parallels between her putting herself through school by doing porn, and other young men/women putting themselves through school by joining the military. Both institutions will target or recruit the young and naive. Either could play out as either A) a largely positive experience, B) a fairly neutral means to an end (pay for college), or C) a soul crushing hell that chews you up and spits you out as an utterly broken shell of a human being.

Maybe the military has a lower rate of option C than porn. Maybe. But on the other hand, the porn industry is much less likely to brainwash you into going to some country you know nothing about and ordering you to kill people that you don't have any personal conflict with. Interesting which choice gets widespread support and respect from the general population, as compared to those that make the other choice being ostracized, shamed, and shunned by former friends and family alike...