which post was worse?

[dead0man]

post A

all people of certain incomes/disadvantaged backgrounds should feel free to take anything they need from essential goods stores like target and then the gov simply reimburses target later for the merchandise

post 2

You can tell because the dog is staying with you, is not growling at you, is not showing any signs of aggression. Is not clawing or chewing you to pieces. Ever see how well padded a person has to be to train police dogs?  A zoo does not have much if anything on when they have sex. Does that tell you something?

zoosexual sex or casual sex between two different species, which is known as bestiality, zoophile net, an extremely kind, and loving thing to do, zoo’s have a deep love that many do not have. This is extremely pleasurable, positives for both species, and  helps to control population. No surgery is needed for ether species. No condoms needed. No STDs. The non humans love sex. Both species loves sex.

By all means legalize this kind of sex.  Whole planet is about sex.  Let us relax, and enjoy it. Doing unto others what you would want others to do unto you. Being wise, and harmless, Being a peacemaker, and things will be just fine.

[PSOL]

lmao, well done Dead0

Obviously I don’t want society to break down as people by and large need to earn what they get in life and the government should not be bailing out corporations for what are largely their mistake. After a lot of thinking and dealing with UBI and my own situation, he who does not work should not eat unless they have a great alibi.

Beastiality should be understood as a historical phenomenon of the human condition. Alienation of humanity towards one another and the relative ease of living and prospering with animals has led to such a relationship being persistent. In the past, risk of disease and parasites was high and spread to other people in close proximity a threat. While beastiality is probably less common than it was in the past by a great magnitude thanks to urbanization and less exposure to animals, it is more visible online thanks to previously isolated practitioners meeting up online and posting away which gets outside attention. What differs is the change in scientific innovation and medical practices that makes such sex safer than ever if you know what to do.

People should generally have sexual relations with one another and going for animals weakens common solidarity among our race. Inherently there is no reason as to why such best practices as to ensure unity among us should not be promoted over any sort of intimate relations with animals. Animals are merely tools to be used to advance the human condition and ensure a better society, if pets and/or sex are the only things preventing someone from killing themselves as that’s the only thing they got, well we have to award some sort of flexibility here because a lot of them are in essential professions.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's a generally accepted principle of the law in many countries that crimes against property cannot be punished if they were committed for the purpose of preserving one's own (or a loved one's) life. So yeah, someone who shoplifts because they're starving should not be punished or even blamed. The fault belongs to a society that gives people no other choice to avoid starving. You'd have to have the compassion of a Hugo or Dickens villain not to recognize that.

[Goldwater]

lmao, well done Dead0

Obviously I don’t want society to break down as people by and large need to earn what they get in life and the government should not be bailing out corporations for what are largely their mistake. After a lot of thinking and dealing with UBI and my own situation, he who does not work should not eat unless they have a great alibi.

Beastiality should be understood as a historical phenomenon of the human condition. Alienation of humanity towards one another and the relative ease of living and prospering with animals has led to such a relationship being persistent. In the past, risk of disease and parasites was high and spread to other people in close proximity a threat. While beastiality is probably less common than it was in the past by a great magnitude thanks to urbanization and less exposure to animals, it is more visible online thanks to previously isolated practitioners meeting up online and posting away which gets outside attention. What differs is the change in scientific innovation and medical practices that makes such sex safer than ever if you know what to do.

People should generally have sexual relations with one another and going for animals weakens common solidarity among our race. Inherently there is no reason as to why such best practices as to ensure unity among us should not be promoted over any sort of intimate relations with animals. Animals are merely tools to be used to advance the human condition and ensure a better society, if pets and/or sex are the only things preventing someone from killing themselves as that’s the only thing they got, well we have to award some sort of flexibility here because a lot of them are in essential professions.

[PSOL]

It's a generally accepted principle of the law in many countries that crimes against property cannot be punished if they were committed for the purpose of preserving one's own (or a loved one's) life. So yeah, someone who shoplifts because they're starving should not be punished or even blamed. The fault belongs to a society that gives people no other choice to avoid starving. You'd have to have the compassion of a Hugo or Dickens villain not to recognize that.

The goal should be to ensure no one has any reason to steal at all as they have a shot at making bank and prospering fairly, not to just ignore real world structural problems and let people remain poor and desperate.

[dead0man]

It's a generally accepted principle of the law in many countries that crimes against property cannot be punished if they were committed for the purpose of preserving one's own (or a loved one's) life. So yeah, someone who shoplifts because they're starving should not be punished or even blamed. The fault belongs to a society that gives people no other choice to avoid starving. You'd have to have the compassion of a Hugo or Dickens villain not to recognize that.

I 100% agree with you, but zero people in the West have to steal food to not die and that's not what the quoted post was asking for anyway

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The first post offends my sensibilities in a way the latter doesn't. So Post A.

[satsuma]

Post A is just more "tempting" to normal people because it's the garden-variety "foolishness disguised as compassion" of everyone who's never thought through what happens if openly stealing is normalized, rather than a worrying indication of having a dog fetish. Bestiality not the worst crime ever from an objective PoV, it's just disgusting and practiced by either the terminally horny & desperate or those so perverted they're attracted to the wrong species.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's a generally accepted principle of the law in many countries that crimes against property cannot be punished if they were committed for the purpose of preserving one's own (or a loved one's) life. So yeah, someone who shoplifts because they're starving should not be punished or even blamed. The fault belongs to a society that gives people no other choice to avoid starving. You'd have to have the compassion of a Hugo or Dickens villain not to recognize that.

I 100% agree with you, but zero people in the West have to steal food to not die and that's not what the quoted post was asking for anyway

There are no homeless people who lack access to a shelter or a soup kitchen and aren't able to beg for money (possibly because many areas criminalize that too) in the West? Zero?? I wish I could believe you.

[dead0man]

It's a generally accepted principle of the law in many countries that crimes against property cannot be punished if they were committed for the purpose of preserving one's own (or a loved one's) life. So yeah, someone who shoplifts because they're starving should not be punished or even blamed. The fault belongs to a society that gives people no other choice to avoid starving. You'd have to have the compassion of a Hugo or Dickens villain not to recognize that.

I 100% agree with you, but zero people in the West have to steal food to not die and that's not what the quoted post was asking for anyway

There are no homeless people who lack access to a shelter or a soup kitchen and aren't able to beg for money (possibly because many areas criminalize that too) in the West? Zero?? I wish I could believe you.

every big city has multiple food pantries that always have food, small towns have churches and good people who actually know the hungry person and won't let them die.  Yes, there millions of sad cases, shelters suck (because they are full of homeless people) and sometimes the pantries are low, sometimes the govt we elect shuts down people helping the poor and yes, sometimes the individuals stuck in this horrible situation know no better than to steal some food to make their tummy stop rumbling and those people should not be punished for such an act.


but to make it policy for "all people of certain incomes/disadvantaged backgrounds" is dumb

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's a generally accepted principle of the law in many countries that crimes against property cannot be punished if they were committed for the purpose of preserving one's own (or a loved one's) life. So yeah, someone who shoplifts because they're starving should not be punished or even blamed. The fault belongs to a society that gives people no other choice to avoid starving. You'd have to have the compassion of a Hugo or Dickens villain not to recognize that.

I 100% agree with you, but zero people in the West have to steal food to not die and that's not what the quoted post was asking for anyway

There are no homeless people who lack access to a shelter or a soup kitchen and aren't able to beg for money (possibly because many areas criminalize that too) in the West? Zero?? I wish I could believe you.

every big city has multiple food pantries that always have food, small towns have churches and good people who actually know the hungry person and won't let them die.  Yes, there millions of sad cases, shelters suck (because they are full of homeless people) and sometimes the pantries are low, sometimes the govt we elect shuts down people helping the poor and yes, sometimes the individuals stuck in this horrible situation know no better than to steal some food to make their tummy stop rumbling and those people should not be punished for such an act.


but to make it policy for "all people of certain incomes/disadvantaged backgrounds" is dumb

I mean "disadvantaged backgrounds" is vague enough that you could define it like we just did. Of course I'm sure PSLOL has a more extensive definition than that, and I'm not defending that, but the post in a vacuum doesn't bother me too much (certainly not as much as the pro-dogf**king one).