Holla Forums, do you support polygamy between consenting adults?

Define exactly what that term means.

Nazi salutes have been illegal since the end of WWII, brainlet.

Easier said than done, but I was specifically referring to the progressive leftist movements as they've existed from the 60's onward.

well first off, see
second off, It's more of a liberal/libertarian thing than a leftist thing.

The whole model of liberalism is based on legalizing as much shit as possible. Basically, they want everyone to do be allowed to do anything they want as long as it doesn't directly cause undue harm to others. So naturally things we see as extreme today will not be seen nearly as extreme when the next generation comes around provided that liberalism grows in the next generation.
Liberalism IS a slippery slope and it is wrong. But it's not wrong because it's a slippery slope.

Not that guy, but political right and left cannot have strong definitions. They're historical terms that essentially talk about vague teams, but the members and goals of those teams can change drastically over time. While the left has in most places and times been seen as liberal, this is not necessarily the case, and even then, what is liberal is itself partially defined by what is conervative in its context, and that is then defined by the historical events of that context.

In our current context, it's useful to talk about "the left" since the western left has largely abandoned liberal values and has become very socially conservative, or rather, regressive. They've also largely stopped giving a shit about economics, and as such don't advocate liberal economic policies as much anymore. SJWs now do nothing but advocate judging people on the color of their skin, not the content of their character, something which would not at all be seen as liberal in their own context.

That for me is the defining variable too.

>>7841083I believe in loving hand holding, gentle head pats, and consensual heterosexual sex in the missionary position with a legally married spouse of legal age, for the sole purpose of reproduction.

While we're being fucking cavemen that just envoke feelings asjustification for the fucking law, sure, why not, let's have polygamy be legal for civil unions so long as we also make it legal to go into someone's house, beat them with a club, then rape their family.

Only difference between that and what wound happen is that one of them uses social pressure instead of a club, so introverts need some edge, right?

Honestly the only people who I've seen support polygamy are whores who want their degeneracy normalized so they don't feel bad about being whores, and beta cucks who kept falling for girls in highschool with boyfriends so much that they don't mind getting someone else's table scraps.

Attached: 9fb85852986c8b2287e324c34c8fa5ad556fffc5af865b1a73148e87fd64310f.jpg (900x636, 165.39K)

No. It's only viable if most men died in war, and only for one generation. Otherwise the whole country would end up like any middle-east shithole where polygamy is legal, a few men own all the pussy and the rest will do anything for a chance. Man, like a few other animals, evolved to be monogamous and that wasn't by chance but because it's what works best for us.

...

Except people very rarely describe slippery slopes so specifically like in OP's strawmen. Slippery slopes aren't typically defined as "if you allow interracial marriages to happen then gay marriage will happen!". A slippery slope is used to describe an overall degradation of principles and morals.

If you ever want a good example of the slippery slope in action, look at my home country Canada. They start suppressing speech, which impedes on a fundamental principle. The argument is that because that principle has been broken that it allows for the possibility of exploitation. Now it's illegal to say nigger, possess lewd anime, or criticize islam.

Or we could look at an example more closely related to sex. Gay marriage is allowed, a fundamental principle is broken. What follows is decades of "live and let live" rhetoric which slowly erodes at communities self-moderating degenerate behavior because everyone is told to fuck off and leave each other alone. Now the courts have ruled that fucking your dog is legal.

Gay marriage and interracial marriage are very much in the same line of reasoning. They both break fundamental principles that were the back bone to our morality and societal cohesion. Without these principles society will whither away from apathy while malicious parties take advantage.

Jealous?

...

dumbest strawman i have seen all day

How so? Race mixing is worse though, since with faggotry at least you don't doom anyone to a shitty life.

Here's the thing: when speech is suppressed it's always a certain kind of speech. One kind at a time. You can argue in favor of the principle of free speech in a totalistic sense, you can argue for the protection of the speech which is under fire, but arguing that "infringing this kind of free speech will lead to other kinds of speech being banned" is not a valid line of reasoning.
There's nothing wrong with saying "no speech should be illegal." You are committing no fallacy there. But by bringing up other kinds of speech that aren't under legal scrutiny during a debate about a specific kind of speech which is, you're wasting everyone's time.

This doesn't make the decision itself bad. By legalizing interracial marriage you are changing the principle, but at that point the principle that marriage is between a man and a woman is retained until that is broken through the legalization of gay marriage. But even today the principle stands that marriage is between two consenting human adults from two different families. Maybe that will change as well but maybe not. comparing coal burners to faggots to dog fuckers remains a waste of everyone's time. If your stance is "no fundamental principles should ever be broken," then you're basically saying society is perfect as it is and should never be changed.

You are a genuine sick fuck, do you know that?
GET
OUT

no, there is no pressure from nature anymore, meaning if we want to get better as a species, we need to do it ourselves
we need to not let the undesirable breed, and make the desirable breed

That's a lot of explanation that could be shrunk into a single sentence:

"The end goal of all leftism is the destruction of Western society and the replacement of whites with foreigners."

its only okay for a man to marry more than one woman

well why not the other way too?
is it because your a sexist pig?

Attached: 1410495946458.jpg (512x384, 80.26K)

but bigamy is actually legal, tbqh

Let me walk you into the gas chamber

The term is subreddit, shitlord.

You kikes will get your own in due time

...

Attached: meme92.jpg (724x634, 244.23K)