Upload
Login or register

tyraxio

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:7/31/2012
Last Login:9/19/2016
Stats
Content Thumbs: 1903 total,  2300 ,  397
Comment Thumbs: 2601 total,  3945 ,  1344
Content Level Progress: 99% (99/100)
Level 118 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 119 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress: 34% (34/100)
Level 225 Comments: Mind Blower → Level 226 Comments: Mind Blower
Subscribers:0
Content Views:91739
Times Content Favorited:110 times
Total Comments Made:1508
FJ Points:4392

latest user's comments

#331 - What. The. ****. Are you ******* insane? Are you seri…  [+] (2 replies) 01/21/2014 on Gay Pride 0
User avatar
#332 - kingdork (01/22/2014) [-]
You should be asking yourself: what is the agenda of those who supply the money? What interest does a German National Bank have in giving away their money to someone who advocate the changing of education in any way in the United States.

Another GLSEN sponsor is IBM. Am I saying IBM wants Naziism for the globe? No. Am I saying IBM wants the power of governing without borders? You would have to answer that on your own.

IBM also funds Ted Talks, through an IBM created program named Smarter Planet. TED is regularly criticized for censoring speakers from talking about Monsanto.
www.naturalnews.com/042112_TED_conferences_pseudoscience_GMO.html

www.theawl.com/2014/01/what-if-these-seven-famous-ted-talks-are-just-totally-wrong
#334 - tyraxio (01/24/2014) [-]
Ahh, good, you're thinking now. So, here's the deal.

Companies will only ever have two agendae. Money and power. No exceptions. By supporting the LGTB community, IBM and Deutsche Bank has a high chance of getting new customers within the LGTB community. By supporting the LGTB community, I am not supporting IBM and Deutsche Bank directly or indirectly, regardless of whether I like the companies or not.

I am an anti-capitalist, don't think I don't know what companies want. I know Red Bull doesn't sponsor a dude to fall from what is almost outer space to Earth just for shits and giggles, no, they do it to get customers. However, important note, I am also not a stupid conspiricist. I'm not implying Coca Cola wants to take over the Earth. I am accepting that lobbyism exists, and I oppose it like Hell, but I am not going to believe that, in any kind of near future, that companies will take complete control of a country.
#109 - It does in this case though. The Bible pretty explicitly state…  [+] (1 reply) 01/19/2014 on Gay Pride +2
User avatar
#110 - Awesomenessniss (01/19/2014) [-]
What I am saying is that not every Republican, and not every Christian think the exact same way and all everyone ever talks about is those they profile. Moderate master race signing out.
#108 - I'm not sure if I should thumb you up or down because I'm not …  [+] (6 replies) 01/19/2014 on Gay Pride +3
User avatar
#149 - kingdork (01/19/2014) [-]
I forgot to add: That video in the previous comment is of anti-bullying gay rights activist, Dan Savage, speaking to a high school about how to deal with bullying as a teen if you're gay. He goes on a rant on how Christianity is responsible for the bullying of gay teens and a long rant of Christianity being the root cause of more genocides than anything else. The majority of the student body cheer in deafening applause while a couple dozen students storm out.

Do you remember high school? I remember high school. Gay students being bullied tend to be bullied by the same assholes that bullied the Catholic boy for being a virgin. If I remember correctly, and I am sure I do because I was in high school only two years ago, the crowd that bullied gays tended to be mostly douches, preppy, stuck-up, and would tolerate other gay kids as long as they were as asshole-ish as them. The Christian kids from my high school were nice and friendly to just about everyone.

Gay people being married wont bring down the country. The divide and conquer will. Look at the leaders of the mainstream gay movement. Jarrett Barrios. Dan Savage. Kevin Jennings. Bill Ayers. Look at the books they write.

Kevin Jennings founded the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network. He flat out fucking says that the manage of education be taken away from local and state governments, and education be controlled by a central government so it can teach children of alternative lifestyles in sex-ed.

www.keywiki.org/index.php/GLSEN
Look at those who sponsor Jennings's GLSEN. Deutsche Bank. AT&T. IBM. These are all companies that lobby fiercely for unpopular free-trade agreements. IBM even traded with the Nazis.

Ever seen Schindler's List? You know how in the opening scene, there are typewriters creating name cards for prisoners as they step into the concentration camps. Those typewriters were made by IBM.

Ford Foundation too. They have a dark history of deceit and corruption.
#331 - tyraxio (01/21/2014) [-]
What. The. Fuck.

Are you fucking insane? Are you seriously saying that there is a correlation between companies that support the LGTB population and the fact that these companies used to trade with Nazi Germany? I am stunned and shocked.

I am not even going to get into big details here, but EVERYONE traded with Nazi Germany. Am I to boycott Ford, Volkswagen, Coca Cola and many more, not based on their exploitation of workers and such today, but due to the fact that more than 50 years ago they traded with Nazi Germany because that was an amazing source of income?
User avatar
#332 - kingdork (01/22/2014) [-]
You should be asking yourself: what is the agenda of those who supply the money? What interest does a German National Bank have in giving away their money to someone who advocate the changing of education in any way in the United States.

Another GLSEN sponsor is IBM. Am I saying IBM wants Naziism for the globe? No. Am I saying IBM wants the power of governing without borders? You would have to answer that on your own.

IBM also funds Ted Talks, through an IBM created program named Smarter Planet. TED is regularly criticized for censoring speakers from talking about Monsanto.
www.naturalnews.com/042112_TED_conferences_pseudoscience_GMO.html

www.theawl.com/2014/01/what-if-these-seven-famous-ted-talks-are-just-totally-wrong
#334 - tyraxio (01/24/2014) [-]
Ahh, good, you're thinking now. So, here's the deal.

Companies will only ever have two agendae. Money and power. No exceptions. By supporting the LGTB community, IBM and Deutsche Bank has a high chance of getting new customers within the LGTB community. By supporting the LGTB community, I am not supporting IBM and Deutsche Bank directly or indirectly, regardless of whether I like the companies or not.

I am an anti-capitalist, don't think I don't know what companies want. I know Red Bull doesn't sponsor a dude to fall from what is almost outer space to Earth just for shits and giggles, no, they do it to get customers. However, important note, I am also not a stupid conspiricist. I'm not implying Coca Cola wants to take over the Earth. I am accepting that lobbyism exists, and I oppose it like Hell, but I am not going to believe that, in any kind of near future, that companies will take complete control of a country.
User avatar
#152 - kingdork (01/19/2014) [-]
for fuck's sake, look at this

www.tpnonline.org/organisation/business-members/

How many of those corporations funding trans Atlantic Policy Network happen to be funding GLSEN too?

www.keywiki.org/index.php/GLSEN

GLSEN says the federal government needs the authority to make schools teach about LGBT lifestyles in sex-ed. But once they get the authority and power to do that, won't they also be writing curriculums for economic classes that teach kids to support NAFTA?

Here is a little more of the TPN: www.tpnonline.org/the-transatlantic-partnership-the-vital-context/
User avatar
#143 - kingdork (01/19/2014) [-]
I'll word it another way. There has always been a religious presence in America, but this generation is different. 92% of high school graduates have no religious identity if recent statistics are accurate. Dan Savage discusses bible at High School Journalism convention I have been to Gay Straight Alliance meetings at my school. They talk of religion as if it is an extinct doctrine. I am not saying anyone needs to be part of a religion, but understanding religions is crucial to understanding the history of our country, and when people dont understand history, bad things happen. Take this guy in the video I have linked to in this comment. He regularly spouts out stuff about religion that is so nasty any sensible person should classify it as hate speech. Watch the video, you'll see how the divide and conquer methods are in work. I believe there is a giant amount of hate speech directed against christians from the liberal communities which goes under reported because Christians aren't seen as victims of anything.
#526 - I am not saying that all American individuals do not accept ho…  [+] (2 replies) 01/19/2014 on Makes sence I guess 0
User avatar
#529 - thejerseyjenn (01/19/2014) [-]
Let's not go as far as to say Russia and America are practically one in the same. America is not nearly as corrupt as Russia.

You may have noticed that America, politically, (just look at the federal government), is liberal. However, in practice it is conservative. The nation is really gridlocked with what it wants, this really isn't going to change for the next 20 years or so. Take a look at the republican party. There are two sides to it right now. The tea party side of almost fascist conservatives, then the more moderate side. That's causing problems for them but thankfully, pressure from their constituents is making gay marriage legalized in more and more states.
Just because a country was founded 300 years ago on a base of freedom, does not mean that all of its citizens now are willing to comply to that. This is a question of morality. Should it be? Probably not since no one is being harmed.

If you are gay, and live in America now, in a state where gay marriage is not legal, I'm very sorry that you can't enter into a marriage with your partner. However, this will change. Slowly, yes, but surely. That's how to US government was set up. To change with the times but to make that change slow. Remember, the last time a radical change happened it caused a civil war.
#553 - tyraxio (01/19/2014) [-]
America is in theory liberal, but is in practice 100% conservative, and that is not only not going to change in the next 20 years, that will not change in a long, long time.

Russia is more corrupt than America? I think not, it's just that American production is a lot more sophisticated. Look at lobbyism in America. It is the purest form of corruption there is. These are companies like McDonalds who give the politicians serious cash to lower health guidelines so that people are more likely to eat their shit food, and it goes even deeper than that, because you've got companies that lobby in to some really serious issues.

My point is not only on the fact that it seems contradictory for America to be as un-liberal as it is, it is of how Americans (and I am talking the vast majority of Americans here) seems to wave America around with a kind of nationalism (*cough* I meant patriotism - when it's America it's never nationalism) that roots in the fact that it is a free country.

How do you define a radical change? And how can you say that "it will change in time"? Are you implying that everything will change for the better? I do doubt it. That means, before the death of humankind, America will be a country with the best healthcare system in the world, where all animal farming is organic and free-range (if at all existing), a CO2 neutral country and many more? As far as my logical thinking goes, the previously mentioned will never be true of America, and if you hold that it most definately will, then you are blind and need to open your eyes.

The American Dream and concept of itself is dead. You've got your government trying to establish 100% monitoring, and you don't see it happening, but rather you go to the shop to buy an American flag and wave it around saying that America is the best and most free country in the world.
#520 - But it should be a marriage. The fact that there is a…  [+] (4 replies) 01/19/2014 on Makes sence I guess -1
User avatar
#525 - thejerseyjenn (01/19/2014) [-]
I agree with you, marriage shouldn't depend on gender. However, when you say Americans don't accept homosexuals you're not totally correct. Most Americans that live in cities and on the east and west coasts do. It's really the bible belt that's weird about it. America has a history of cultural division (civil war), because it's so big, it wasn't easy to keep the whole nation on the same page 150 years ago. That led to a division of culture and as some areas blossomed into the industrial revolution and accepted science and education, others stayed largely as farm areas. So, while now it's easier to keep people updated the damage has already been done.

I think what Bible thumpers don't realize is that churches won't be forced to give gay marriages. Everyone thinks that what they're doing is right, so there's no way to really change their minds. At this point we just need to wait until the baby boomer generation dies out.
#526 - tyraxio (01/19/2014) [-]
I am not saying that all American individuals do not accept homosexuals, only that something is wrong with a country as a whole, when it is a debate rather than a question of a few ignorant idiots whose voices are not heard in the public debate. Especially, when the country in which this debate takes place, is a country known for it's reputation of being the free-est country in the world, and value liberty and personal freedom over anything, there is a huge problem.

And people think America is radically different from Russia... Not realising they are practically insync.
User avatar
#529 - thejerseyjenn (01/19/2014) [-]
Let's not go as far as to say Russia and America are practically one in the same. America is not nearly as corrupt as Russia.

You may have noticed that America, politically, (just look at the federal government), is liberal. However, in practice it is conservative. The nation is really gridlocked with what it wants, this really isn't going to change for the next 20 years or so. Take a look at the republican party. There are two sides to it right now. The tea party side of almost fascist conservatives, then the more moderate side. That's causing problems for them but thankfully, pressure from their constituents is making gay marriage legalized in more and more states.
Just because a country was founded 300 years ago on a base of freedom, does not mean that all of its citizens now are willing to comply to that. This is a question of morality. Should it be? Probably not since no one is being harmed.

If you are gay, and live in America now, in a state where gay marriage is not legal, I'm very sorry that you can't enter into a marriage with your partner. However, this will change. Slowly, yes, but surely. That's how to US government was set up. To change with the times but to make that change slow. Remember, the last time a radical change happened it caused a civil war.
#553 - tyraxio (01/19/2014) [-]
America is in theory liberal, but is in practice 100% conservative, and that is not only not going to change in the next 20 years, that will not change in a long, long time.

Russia is more corrupt than America? I think not, it's just that American production is a lot more sophisticated. Look at lobbyism in America. It is the purest form of corruption there is. These are companies like McDonalds who give the politicians serious cash to lower health guidelines so that people are more likely to eat their shit food, and it goes even deeper than that, because you've got companies that lobby in to some really serious issues.

My point is not only on the fact that it seems contradictory for America to be as un-liberal as it is, it is of how Americans (and I am talking the vast majority of Americans here) seems to wave America around with a kind of nationalism (*cough* I meant patriotism - when it's America it's never nationalism) that roots in the fact that it is a free country.

How do you define a radical change? And how can you say that "it will change in time"? Are you implying that everything will change for the better? I do doubt it. That means, before the death of humankind, America will be a country with the best healthcare system in the world, where all animal farming is organic and free-range (if at all existing), a CO2 neutral country and many more? As far as my logical thinking goes, the previously mentioned will never be true of America, and if you hold that it most definately will, then you are blind and need to open your eyes.

The American Dream and concept of itself is dead. You've got your government trying to establish 100% monitoring, and you don't see it happening, but rather you go to the shop to buy an American flag and wave it around saying that America is the best and most free country in the world.
#506 - Not gay marriage, being gay in private. Also the civi…  [+] (8 replies) 01/19/2014 on Makes sence I guess +1
User avatar
#557 - dsrtpnk (01/19/2014) [-]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Same_sex_marriage_map_Europe_detailed.svg

Not even Europe is equal so I don't understand why so many are confused or look down upon the US for not accepting homosexual marriage. Nor do I understand the Americans that keep telling us that Europe has already allowed same sex marriage so we should do the same.

I'm only saying that at least with civil unions, you gain a step towards marriage and showing the population that it isn't all bad. It's a better strategy than having a judge overturn the voting booths.
#560 - tyraxio (01/21/2014) [-]
The map you just showed states that civil unions and same-sex marriages are pretty much existing to some degree (I am not quite sure what to make of the "unrecognised" countries, as that can be interpreted vividly) in all of central Europe. Sure, you've got some East Bloc countries where it is forbidden, and without sounding nationalist, I don't think that quite counts as what most people define as "Europe".

Though, that is irrelevant. I am not saying America should be more accepting of same-sex marriages BECAUSE Europe generally is. It's just that it seems contradictory with America's manifest of freedom, liberty and secularisation that homosexuals cannot get married legally in some states.
User avatar
#517 - thejerseyjenn (01/19/2014) [-]
A civil union does not grant ALL of the privileges that a marriage does. I'm not exactly sure what the differences are though, something about children and insurance. My gay gym teacher explained it once but I have since forgotten.

It's not called a marriage because it isn't a marriage.
#520 - tyraxio (01/19/2014) [-]
But it should be a marriage.

The fact that there is a difference (I don't know a lot about it, I'm not American - all I do know is that Americans are fucking weird for not accepting homosexuals legally in the 21st century) only makes it a lot worse. I don't see why I am not qualified to enter a legal relationship of equal standards to that of a heterosexual couple just because me and my partner has the same genitals. No, I cant reproduce sexually, but is that really everything marriage is about nowadays? Hell no. I am as entitled to be married as my neighbour is.
User avatar
#525 - thejerseyjenn (01/19/2014) [-]
I agree with you, marriage shouldn't depend on gender. However, when you say Americans don't accept homosexuals you're not totally correct. Most Americans that live in cities and on the east and west coasts do. It's really the bible belt that's weird about it. America has a history of cultural division (civil war), because it's so big, it wasn't easy to keep the whole nation on the same page 150 years ago. That led to a division of culture and as some areas blossomed into the industrial revolution and accepted science and education, others stayed largely as farm areas. So, while now it's easier to keep people updated the damage has already been done.

I think what Bible thumpers don't realize is that churches won't be forced to give gay marriages. Everyone thinks that what they're doing is right, so there's no way to really change their minds. At this point we just need to wait until the baby boomer generation dies out.
#526 - tyraxio (01/19/2014) [-]
I am not saying that all American individuals do not accept homosexuals, only that something is wrong with a country as a whole, when it is a debate rather than a question of a few ignorant idiots whose voices are not heard in the public debate. Especially, when the country in which this debate takes place, is a country known for it's reputation of being the free-est country in the world, and value liberty and personal freedom over anything, there is a huge problem.

And people think America is radically different from Russia... Not realising they are practically insync.
User avatar
#529 - thejerseyjenn (01/19/2014) [-]
Let's not go as far as to say Russia and America are practically one in the same. America is not nearly as corrupt as Russia.

You may have noticed that America, politically, (just look at the federal government), is liberal. However, in practice it is conservative. The nation is really gridlocked with what it wants, this really isn't going to change for the next 20 years or so. Take a look at the republican party. There are two sides to it right now. The tea party side of almost fascist conservatives, then the more moderate side. That's causing problems for them but thankfully, pressure from their constituents is making gay marriage legalized in more and more states.
Just because a country was founded 300 years ago on a base of freedom, does not mean that all of its citizens now are willing to comply to that. This is a question of morality. Should it be? Probably not since no one is being harmed.

If you are gay, and live in America now, in a state where gay marriage is not legal, I'm very sorry that you can't enter into a marriage with your partner. However, this will change. Slowly, yes, but surely. That's how to US government was set up. To change with the times but to make that change slow. Remember, the last time a radical change happened it caused a civil war.
#553 - tyraxio (01/19/2014) [-]
America is in theory liberal, but is in practice 100% conservative, and that is not only not going to change in the next 20 years, that will not change in a long, long time.

Russia is more corrupt than America? I think not, it's just that American production is a lot more sophisticated. Look at lobbyism in America. It is the purest form of corruption there is. These are companies like McDonalds who give the politicians serious cash to lower health guidelines so that people are more likely to eat their shit food, and it goes even deeper than that, because you've got companies that lobby in to some really serious issues.

My point is not only on the fact that it seems contradictory for America to be as un-liberal as it is, it is of how Americans (and I am talking the vast majority of Americans here) seems to wave America around with a kind of nationalism (*cough* I meant patriotism - when it's America it's never nationalism) that roots in the fact that it is a free country.

How do you define a radical change? And how can you say that "it will change in time"? Are you implying that everything will change for the better? I do doubt it. That means, before the death of humankind, America will be a country with the best healthcare system in the world, where all animal farming is organic and free-range (if at all existing), a CO2 neutral country and many more? As far as my logical thinking goes, the previously mentioned will never be true of America, and if you hold that it most definately will, then you are blind and need to open your eyes.

The American Dream and concept of itself is dead. You've got your government trying to establish 100% monitoring, and you don't see it happening, but rather you go to the shop to buy an American flag and wave it around saying that America is the best and most free country in the world.
#347 - I literally could not comprehend that sentence.  [+] (1 reply) 01/17/2014 on I agree with this 0
#364 - pjers (08/11/2014) [-]
it was weed I was implying.