EnduranceFun's forum posts

#1 Posted by EnduranceFun (1116 posts) -

@animasta: Look at places like China, Japan and South Korea. All have skills that were built up by their populace in isolation for thousands of years that have been applied to the modern economy to their own benefit as well as the world's. Is all I mean.

#2 Posted by EnduranceFun (1116 posts) -

@rollingzeppelin: Aw, that's hardly fair. I don't disrespect any of you for holding an opinion. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.

#3 Posted by EnduranceFun (1116 posts) -

@endurancefun said:

I appreciate the responses, I totally disagree with the science. The idea that keeping to your own race = inbreeding is disgusting. I suppose all of Africa, mostly homogeneous Africans who are innately likelier to be less diverse than Europeans, are massively in-breeding? And China too? If that was true, Europe would've died out entirely long ago, but it was flourishing up until a recent push for multiculturalism from the top-down. And yes, we're all blind to race until it comes time to take reparations for the past. There's no race except the human race! [spoilerblock]Unless you're that one color.[/spoilerblock]

Disagree with the science all you want. Luckily, science isn't a matter of opinion. I'll trust the science before I trust your David Duke-style nonsense. Animals are meant to breed and share their genes. It's how they evolve. Keeping the gene pools seperate does no one any good.

Races developed for a reason, some are better than others most of the time at certain tasks and playing God with genetics because of "love," a truly scientific term, is stupid. I'd rather have white, hispanic, black, asian, indian, etc etc., true diversity, than end up with one race whose strongest bonds are to the life-giving state, not their nation or family who are out for themselves.

#5 Posted by EnduranceFun (1116 posts) -

@colourful_hippie said:

@endurancefun said:

It was the first bulwark in the breakdown of traditional families and lifestyles that made western civilisation strong for thousands of years. Yes yes, love is blind, I'm sure in a hundred years we'll see infants being "liberated" from oppressive pedophobic laws as well. Also by blending everyone up into the same generic brown race you destroy bio-diversity in humanity, if the whole world engaged in this suicide it would actually make the whole world more susceptible to disease and extinction. Mixed-race children also generally are more likely to suffer from mental problems. So no, I'm not for it in any sense. *prolonged gasp from the peanut gallery*

hahaha, oh god and here I thought I was afraid that I wasn't going to run into a batshit insane comment. Thank you.

Hey man, the follow button exists for a reason.

@aetheldod: Thank you for being honest. This is an issue that is very hard to disagree on without being labelled a million different things, it's difficult to admit to your true feelings if they don't reflect the norm.

#6 Posted by EnduranceFun (1116 posts) -

@extomar said:

@endurancefun said:

@extomar said:

@aiurflux The issue isn't that Zimmerman couldn't or shouldn't defend himself in a fight against Martins but that Zimmerman instigated an entirely unnecessary confrontation. If you look at it another way, Martins followed "Stand Your Ground" (a stranger assaulted him) and died so I'm unclear how it is justified for Martins. What should have Martins done instead?

But that is not true. Zimmerman didn't instigate anything by following Martin. That is legal, and it's ridiculous to even think it shouldn't be. Martin instigated the fight when he assaulted Zimmerman.

I like how sure you are but utterly wrong. :)

My father who just retired as a police officer offered some insight into stances like yours: If someone is vehemently, repeatedly and consistently claiming what they was "legal" instead of "correct" or "right" then they know what they did was bad but are worming their way out. Your fixation on who instigated what and legality is cute but are ultimately unprovable and aren't worth discussing especially in terms of justice.

What is provable in law is objective and far more reasonable than making blind assumptions.

#7 Posted by EnduranceFun (1116 posts) -
#8 Edited by EnduranceFun (1116 posts) -

@jasonr86: It may have something to do with me losing my job if I do that? It doesn't bother me as at certain points in history the same was true for those who thought the Earth was round, or that women should be allowed to wear pants. Plenty of stupid shit has taken a hold of public opinion in the past and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

#9 Posted by EnduranceFun (1116 posts) -

@animasta said:

@endurancefun: I missed the memo where interracial relationships were required by the government? And that they're still a very small percentage of relationships?

also your opinion is terrible and stuff but you already knew that (which is why you put that thing on at the end).

I'm just logically finding what end results from this action, don't mind me, just using me noggin.

#10 Posted by EnduranceFun (1116 posts) -