Jake P.

Ethical Naturalist & Atheist 🇦🇺 | B.A. | Opinions are my own.

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

The day Pauline Hanson was the most feminist woman in the room. Didn't think I'd ever say it.

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

More than we have.

[ຸLaura Bennett @NefflynB]

HOMBRES, sean honestos, ¿realmente piensan que está bien vivir de esta manera ??

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

R.I.P sweetheart

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

https://t.co/iXehxxdmE9

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

https://t.co/ucejcd4ot1

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@jennineak This is just the version they wrote for Western leftists

[Lozzy B 🇦🇺𝕏 @TruthFairy131]

Australia’s racist ‘Race Commissioner’, an immigrant from India states “White people cannot experience racism” 😡

“Whilst white people can experience multiple forms of discrimination or prejudice based on gender, sexual orientation, ability, age, or class; they cannot experience racism” -Giridharan Sivaraman.

This in itself is fcking racist. I suggest our ‘Race Commissioner’ educate himself on the meaning of racism.

RACISM
“Racism is when a person is treated worse, excluded, disadvantaged, harassed, bullied, humiliated or degraded because of their race or ethnicity”.

So, Australia is a White Western Nation built, protected & defended by White Western Europeans & this Indian man, a guest in our country comes in & says our experiences with racism, prejudice & hate crimes against our people don’t matter because we have White skin.

This guy has to go 😡

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@PensiveBrush @InspiringPhilos The principle is inherently abhorrent to millions and millions of Muslims because if I started murdering Muslims with my own subjective justification only they would not think it's right and it would not be good for them. You can't say in advance which worldview is accurate.

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@BiancaColecchia Nice to see migrants love their new home for a change

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@DavidofEnglish @adalluch Negative. *Radically* departing from the existing norms and hating your existing country is radicalization, objectively.

[Sana Ebrahimi Ledene @SanaELedene]

This is what Arafat walked away from in late 2000-early 2001:

A Palestinian state on roughly 94–96% of the West Bank (with 1–3% land swaps from Israel), and a capital in East Jerusalem under the Clinton Parameters. Bill Clinton himself has repeatedly described it as 96% of the West Bank plus 4% of Israel in swaps to compensate, with negotiations at Taba in January 2001 even discussing figures near 97%.
Result:
Arafat did not accept.

Palestinian leaders are the ones responsible for their people's suffering. Every opportunity for peace and progress has been sabotaged by their obsession with destroying Israel instead of building a future for their own citizens.

[Mr Patel 🕉️ @Patelindianlion]

@realMaalouf

[Dr. Maalouf ‏ @realMaalouf]

Islamic scholar in Germany:

“Non-Muslims must obey Islamic law. Once we become the majority, non-Muslims must either obey us or convert, or they will be punished.”

What do you think?

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@IskandarKaizer @PensiveBrush @InspiringPhilos Are you serious?

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@IskandarKaizer @PensiveBrush @InspiringPhilos Whenever something is true for you as it is for me, then it's justified or true from an objective standpoint. The moral principle that you advance, that is that subjective justification is sufficient for killing is as bad for you as it is for me, and the other guy next to me.

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@IskandarKaizer @PensiveBrush @InspiringPhilos That's just a strawman. It's action with objective consequences is unjust unless an objective justification is given, because it's unjust to kill for your subjective preferences. Everyone has them, so any killing for any preferences would be justified in the opposite case.

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@IskandarKaizer @PensiveBrush @InspiringPhilos A consequential action, yes. It doesn't make the trade-off being made unjust, just the action.

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@IskandarKaizer @PensiveBrush @InspiringPhilos We don't use any. Only the person making the affirmative assessment of moral necessity is using any definition of moral. It's not the moral trade of the action that is unjust, but taking the action, because it's an objective action (and violent) taken from a controversial basis.

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@IskandarKaizer @PensiveBrush @InspiringPhilos and it's been communicated. Justice is an affirmative assessment, if you can't justify some aggressive or violent action especially as achieving justice or as being morally required (just), then it's unjust by definition.

[Jake P. @jakee_ps]

@IskandarKaizer @PensiveBrush @InspiringPhilos exactly.