I understand your feelings, but this is not something that needs to be legislated. You need to vote with your money on these issues (even to the point of writing the sponsors). Hallmark, Disney, etc. would not make these movies if people didn’t watch them. At this point, I research any new movie to find out what’s in it before I allow my 5 year old grandson to watch it. I’ve never been a big fan of Hallmark movies, so I just completely stopped watching them.
1 Like
Nice try bitch. Stop trying to form an emotional connection or basis from which to manipulate from. No such connection is possible. Who said I wanted a career in politics? Politics is a substitute for war. I don’t want politics with an uncivilized enemy. There is no political solution with an uncivilized enemy.
We can start the healing process you mentioned by you shutting up and going to make me a sandwich. And you didn’t need to type out all that nonsense. All you really needed to say is ‘thank you’.
Shouldn’t be a federal law. It would violate free speech. Don’t go see movies that have it.
Sex isn’t speech. We speak in public. We don’t have sex in public. We rightfully place limits on such behavior in public. It’s not a stretch to extend those limits on public behaviors to also include the same limits on all publically shared spaces, such as publically accessible, broadcasted media.
It’s not about personal preference. It’s about limits and prevention of public access, and elimination of forced content and forced access.
1 Like
Thank you! I haven’t laughed this hard in a while! You seem super mad! Please, continue writing me unhinged replies 
It’s just too good 
Thanks again! This is and I hope will continue to be a blast. If I was betting, I’d be going all in on the unhinged maniac who’s off his meds continuing to dance for me.
Sincerely,
Me
Lol! You are getting dangerously close to making yourself useful. Lmao.
“If I wanted to manipulate you, you wouldn’t know I was doing it. And this isn’t the way I would go about it.” Lol. I think you overestimate your capabilities.
Thanks, but you couldn’t hit the broadside of a barn. Not only are your assessments inaccurate, they’re exhausting. Along with the rest of the female narratives. Women seek irresponsibility for their words and actions and refuse to be civilized and productively useful TO men. In the same way men are required to be civilized and civilize each other to be productive and useful not only to each other, but also women, and society as a whole. These are already the rules for men. Men must demonstrate their value to the point of guaranteeing it on a daily obligatory basis, which used to be the means by which to aquire status and respect. But even that is becoming not enough. What such standards requirement standards exist for women today? What value requirements do women have to meet or demonstrate? What is the standard obligations of women today? What freedom to be irresponsible and unaccountable can they not seize? Feel free to answer this question, if there’s something I’ve missed.
It’s not I who need you to acknowledge that I have value. It is you who needs reassurance and acknowledgment that you have value. That said, if you find your value to be in question, it might be worthwhile for women to begin to inquire what men VALUE. Rather than assuming, attempting to manipulate, and virtue signal what you think is valuable.
Feminism hijacked and rewilded women to be uncivilized , out of order, and in the way, and trains women to reject traditional roles and limitations to their uncivilized instincts.
The correction and solution to these problems is for women to accept their traditional roles, and accept those traditional limits and accountability placed on them by men, by a man, one man, their father, their husband, and other productive women who are civilized, voluntarily as their primary access to safety and status. And to thoughtfully and voluntarily reject feminism. or if they do not, and culture has devolved beyond a salvagable outcome the other solution is the rewilding of the male instincts, to decivilize and reawaken the male methods of warfare, and this will bring about the necessary balance and cooperation between the sexes, and bring about a much needed cultural renewal and cohesion, and restart the processes of civilization.
Lol, this IS fun! And your welcome. I see you’ve changed your name from “redundancy of constipated attempts to form thoughts” to “ME”. Sigh…, which is more accurately what you are truly about.
Lol. Did you read my post? You prove my point. Society requires men to be productive and valuable daily on an ongoing basis or suffer social and economic consequences. . Society does no longer require women to be productive and valuable to the opposite sex on an ongoing daily basis, or to suffer economic or social consequences if they don’t. In fact women are encouraged and praised for doing the opposite of historical traditional social order.
Your style is pretty typical, if you cannot manipulate, you resort to shaming and belittling attempts. The female code has been cracked.
I’m the guy that exes call years after a break up, drunk and in tears crying into my answering service, “what ever happened to us!” I’m not interested in adding to that list.
The men you say you admire are ones who do not require or enforce accountability or reciprocity from you, and afford you irresponsibility. They may provide you a sense of safety, but require nothing in return. And it’sdoubtful they ate serving a support role for the man you ARE responsible to. I’m not getting that you are responsible, accountable, or obligated to anyone but yourself. You enjoy that, but you don’t respect it. And I don’t really respect those types of men either.
Yes, I didn’t figure you could answer it. I guess it involves logic. You’re so used to the status quo you can’t even imagine a context where there were universal basic expectations and obligations women were required to adhere to, or else face personal and social consequences.
You want me to do your thinking and observing for you, or do you have zero exposure to or understanding of the social expectations and obligations of men? Or are you are so far removed from natural environments, only viewing life through the unnatural lens of urban liberal environments that’s void of real men, and you truly are clueless because you have no value producing men to observe?
Why does it feel like I’m programming an AI?
For an education on this topic see Pearly Things. See Fresh & Fit.
The Revolutionary war, firstly. The fact that the colonies borrowed money from the crown in order to wage that war, then refused to repay the debt. The collapse started there. At least, the sovereignty of the federal government collapsed.
The next nail in the coffin was 70 years later, give or take. The civil war. Both sides funded by the crown. Both sides refusing to pay their debts. That was the collapse of state sovereignty…
Next, the series of events between 1913-1933. The federal reserve established, birth certifucates are issued to newborns, gold was taken out of circulation and was confiscated from the people, the depression set in. The people lost their sovereignty at that time.
Fast forward 70 or so more years, and you have Obamas Affordable Care Act. Now the people lost sovereignty over their physical bodies, and are liable for hefty taxes if they refuse health insurance.
Basically, every time we’re due for a jubilee (all debts forgiven), we either throw another war or comparably catastrophic event to nullify that possibility.
Of course, this is a very tangential explanation, but in a nutshell it accounts for each chance that we had at salvaging it. Not sure what sort of terms could be devised to assuage the creditors if we forego the next jubilee, but i tremble to contemplate it.
What kinds of family films are yall even talking about here? I have a 3 year old and an 11 year old and i havent caught even an insinuation of the sort of trash that youre referencing here.
Im as opposed as anyone to brainwashing kids, human trafficking, pedophilia, etc but again i ask- what examples of this do you have? I really want to know, so that i can institute the controls that are already at my disposal to protect my sons from these abominations.
What are the names of these films?
See my ratings post!
I don’t watch the hallmark channel, but the inclusion of gay characters is one more reason not to.
Recently watched Carry On. Christmas action suspense film. Jason Bateman. I gave it a chance, figuring it would be similar to DieHard. Low and Behold, three quarters of the way through, for no reason at all the random insertion of gay couple. Ruined an already mediocre plot that also illicits empathy for the tsa. Total turkey.
1 Like
Ok, firstly:
Your 10 Commandments- Have you read them?
And Second:
I have. I dont think they say what you think they say
1 Like
There are these ratings set on most shows, movies I see on TV, the parents are the ones who need to decide what is watched in there homes, my point is the movie makers insert subliminal messages into the shows, that pertain to what they want you to see, it’s starting to get out of hand, the most is a long the lines of the gay community, ever since they wanted equally they have been pushing it every where, this needs to stop in the movies and shows. If these people want to do that, that’s between God and themselves and should stay in there homes not be pushed into ours.
Great quote from L. Lund.
Are using the same tired trick of wielding the 10 commandments against Christians to foster Christian irresponsibility, rather than weilding it against, or imposing responsibility onto the secular?
Your very suggestion could then be hey you Christians you/we have an obligation to live according to the 10 rules that aids us in taking responsibility for our communities? Or prevents us and limits US from exersizing responsibility for and over our communities?
What such rules then do non Christians have to abide by? Are you advocating for 2 sets of rules? Are you advocating that Christians have no place in deciding the enforceable for their communities because the 10 commandments are a Christians Supreme law? Because they aren’t.
Firstly the 10 commandments are for the ingroup. You understand this, by the very way you implied it applies to me. Why SIR…ARE YOU TRYING TO INVOKE THE LAW TO PUT LIMITS ON MY BEHAVIOR??? You did not imply that they APPLY to anyone else but Christians. But they DO! And they must be enforceable, because you just tried to enforce them on me! Lol.
Take thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not murder. These are such great commandments, once FOR the in group only, are now universally applied as law for the entire range of out group as well.
Either you are promoting Christian irresponsibility in influence and enforcement over the outgroup, or you are promoting Christian responsibility for their ingroup and outgroup communities. Which is it?
Either you are wielding the 10 commandments as an attempt to put me in check, and impose limits on my responsibility, OR you are reminding me that the 10 commandments are applicable and enforceable with all outgroups as well. I don’t want to assume anything.
The 10 commandments are a great basis and starting point for all sorts of laws, applicable to everyone. And there’s no disagreement on that, or else you’re advocating for 2 differing sets of laws within the same community, which has no cohesion, or longevity. Which is pretty much where things are at.
Perhaps the answer is for homosexuals to have their own platforms. That would take away the constant monitoring and angst for the rest of the population.
I don’t understand the conservative mentality to cede territory, and to appease and to extend rights to corrosive social elements. “Between God and them, …what they do in the privacy of their own homes…” It’s not confined to their own homes! They are imposing costs onto the rest of society, and your answer is to not account for the costs imposed on your own people, and to give them more and their own platforms and rights???
Why do conservatives do this? Continually choose to lose, appease, and cede territory and responsibility? Never advancing, always retreating as though the resources are endless.
This is the same mentality as the left. That resources are endless. They aren’t. And in this case the future generations are the resource, but that doesn’t seem to factor in to your thinking as a resource worth protecting. So what values do you actually have? Social decay and managed decline with low taxes and a road to hell with speed limits?
Give them? They earned what?