Most humans are not capable of wisely using their freedom, and so they must be restrained and managed by rules or by those who know what’s best for that individual more than the individual himself. In the past this restraint took place with those who had a sincere investment in the person’s well-belling, such as the family, the tribe, the village, and the local church, but these restraints are long gone, released in the cultural chaos of the post-Enlightenment world. With a general trend of increasing personal freedom around the planet, the only logical result is a steadfast mental and behavioral decline of humanity. Unless people are limited in the personal decisions they’re able to make, they will continue to hurt themselves and others.

My question is very simple – where are the angels, with no ulterior motive whatsoever, who will dictate people’s “personal decisions” as we clearly do not know what is “best” for ourselves?

He presupposes absolute standards e.g. that “pleasures of the body” are “degeneracy and vice”. I would wager that he would be the one to set these standards. He would have people go before the equivalent of a magistrate when they wish to buy a bottle of wine or purchase other such items on the “naughty” list, or obtain a license for activities that are not approved by Daryush Shahanshah, including masturbation.

This is the “neomasculinity” that this imperious twit truly advocates – to have one’s personal life dictated. Frankly, I hope he gets cancer of the brain.

If there ever were a “movement” or “ideology” that was feminism for men, Neo-masculinity seems to be it.

Wow… just… wow.

He critizes people having casual sex yet he continues to have casual sex. Wow what a well educated dummy.

Separation of rights and responsibilities=societal decline.

Crazy Canuck wrote:

Please use http://archive.is so that he doesn’t get the page views he wants.

He critizes people having casual sex yet he continues to have casual sex. Wow what a well educated dummy.

The benefit of religion is that it brings with it objective morality. That is all the rules are true for everybody. Observing the idea of objective morality is imperative to a civilization since everybody has to agree on the same values or it won’t work. Religion convinces people that they are still guilty even if they don’t get caught, and there’s a reason why we do things.

If the article’s author is saying that people cannot be left to their own vices since society would fall apart, I would agree with him completely. If he’s saying we need a monarchy or so because people are stupid, I would not. If he’s saying people are sheep and need shepherds I would agree again. The problem is who or how will they be shepherded?

Now, I’m not advocating a church-state at all. That’s been tried before and the results are disastrous with blood in the streets. No, I’ll build my house in between the atheist and the religious. We can get along.

I suppose one problem in our society is that people have been poorly shepherded. Take churches. In America, church attendance is down, but when you observe what they teach in churches you kind of see a few things, that they’re out of touch, they’re kind of a isolated community, they are cliquish, and they bring in so much tradition that it’s silly. Most churches provide poor shepherding. I know, I’ve been to quite a few of them.

If not churches, then what? Our Ted Talks? Our Universities, or Politics, Facebook, CNN? If those aren’t poor shepherds, then they’re not shepherds at all. CNN is just ISIS 24/7, Politics is just Toon Town, Facebook is narcissism, Universities is all diatribe with massive intellectual dishonesty. We don’t have what we once did.

Add this to the pile of problems. We used to have clans. Clans raised children. Your parents never worried about you because even if you didn’t show up for a few days, they knew where you were and that you were OK. Everybody knew everybody. You also have a strong mentorship and support system. Your parents needed help with you , they got plenty. Maybe too much.

Now we have atomic families and even that’s breaking down. Fathers, as you already know, are seen as useless scum. Children are given absolutely nothing. If you think about it, they’re so overly neglected that it’s funny again. This is a time when we need shepherds the most but a time when most of it is simply incompetent or absent.

I suppose one problem in our society is that people have been poorly shepherded

Bang on assessment.

The old adage of “It takes a village to raise a child” comes to mind with your post. The way I see it however, is that a certain role has reversed in “modern societies”. Where at one time, every village had AN idiot. Now it seems we have an abundance of idiots, and are rather short on the rest of the village.

In an article entitled: “Warning Signs A Girl Isn’t Worth A Relationship” he says (direct quote – no need to link)

There is absolutely no reason for a girl to tell a man “you should…” ever. It insinuates that not only are you currently doing something wrong, but that she knows more than you, which is extremely unlikely. She is free to say, “Have you thought of…” or “What do you think about…” but the moment she brings out the word “should,” a synonym of “must,” I know she’s a arrogant c~~~ who thinks she knows more than she really does. The only things I should or must do are pay my taxes and die.

And now it’s:

They must be restrained and managed by rules or by those who know what’s best for that individual more than the individual himself.

Together with “Don’t Tell A Man What Type Of Woman He Should Be Attracted To”….
…. he has turned himself into a zero credibility piece of s~~~.

Or more accurately, according to his own definition, he’s an: “arrogant c~~~ – who thinks he knows more than he really does”.

For somebody who posits its unacceptable to tell a man what to do, say, and think, right down to who to be attracted to, he successfully made a joke out of himself pretending to know what’s best for the individual more than the individual himself.

You have to wonder if his mother had any children that lived.