Sick evil shit. There's nothing more vile than betraying the innocence of a child. Fuck you sick bastards that find this appealing. I hope your end is in suffering.
That's not a child. That's a drawing.
You realize you're in a cub thread, right? Or do you find THAT acceptable? Did you just out yourself as an actual pedophile?
One, how on earth would my revulsion to the subject matter herein give you the impression I am even faintly okay with this.
Two, whether by drawings or photography or pornographic prose, representing something so anathema to the normal numan condition would illicit the same degree of repugnance walking in on someone abusing a child. The difference is I'm not grabbing a fire extinguisher off the wall and caving someone's skull in for committing such an atrocity. I'm instead expressing the instinctive reaction of seeing such obscene material. There's a reason the law takes the acts depicted herein so gravely serious, why the consequences are so profound, and why those convicted must be protected from others that would end them in prison with the thrust of a shank.
You morally objected specifically to images of fictional children being killed in a thread full of fictional children being molested.
What difference is there between the two? They both depict fictional children being abused, unless you're a pedophile and don't consider sex with children to be abuse.
Anyway, none of it matters because they're harmless drawings.
Children are of no value to me. If fact, they have negative value. They're overabundant, destructive, obnoxious and loud. Seeing a child thrown face-first into a meat grinder would make me less upset than seeing someone cut down a tree. At least the tree has a positive value to the environment.
>>3619122>There's nothing more vile than betraying the innocence of a child.
It is a nonexistent fantasy creature in a fictional situation. Because it is so far removed from reality, people with fully functional adult brains can enjoy the total absurdity of the drawing.
Here, this picture will improve your mood.
>>3619135>people with fully functional adult brains can enjoy the total absurdity of the drawing.
They can, but they have no reason or motivation to.
The only people who do are not fully functional.
A perfectly ordinary man was once asked, "If there were no God, what would keep you from raping and murdering all you want?".
The man replied, "I already am raping and murdering all I want."
Karma will get you freaks, I promise.
Yup, that's the one. Thank you.
>Karma will get you freaks
So now we have a pagan religious fanatic telling us how to behave.>>3619219
Go sacrifice a goat or whatever your superstitious nonsense requires you to do and tend to your own "karma".
And his foreskin died with him.
What a waste of a good foreskin.
Karma can be a completely non-spiritual thing, when understood by a westerner. It's not magic, it's group psychology.
As in, the observation that if you fuck with enough people, you will one day get your comeuppance.
Our word for that is "what goes around, comes around."
pretty sure the pizza pups are a promotional character that you get when you buy some pedo brand pizza. they're supposed to be artificial lifeforms, that's why it's okay to rape and/or eat them
p.s. he does look more molestable with natural colors
>>3619570>Karma can be a completely non-spiritual thing, when understood by a westerner. It's not magic, it's group psychology.
It's too simplistic to explain it as psychology. It's general cause and effect.
Anything you do affects everything around you, and you can't escape the consequences because you're essentially made up of everything that is around you. The point of the idea is that a separate you doesn't exist - there's nothing that experiences or has "karma", but rather that everything follows from causes and conditions and that is called karma, which literally translates to "action".
In western philosophies, people and the world are treated as separate: the world follows simple Newtonian mechanisms, and yet people are free "souls" who have a choice to influence the world. That in the point of view of eastern philosophies is completely mystical and metaphysical, because in their philosophies people too are material and do not have souls, or that "spirit" is just part of the workings of the universe and subject to the same laws as anything else. As you are a manifestation of the workings of the entire universe, karma is your action and your choice, and the individual is just a point of view in this setup.
Wow, hot as fuck. I will now buy your pizzapup
There's another term you are forgetting its called karmic enforcement the act of someone acting out karma rathet than waiting for it.
>>3619570>>Karma can be a completely non-spiritual thing, when understood by a westerner. It's not magic, it's group psychology. >>As in, the observation that if you fuck with enough people, you will one day get your comeuppance.>>Our word for that is "what goes around, comes around."
This sounds like something I have said at some point or another, perhaps on this board even.
Now that being said, I don't agree with the context in which it is being said, people who like cub don't deserve any "comeuppance", no matter how much you disagree with their fetish.
What you're describing is more akin to gambler's fallacy and only a small part of karma. Karma is inherently tied to reincarnation. If you make this world a worse place in this life, then your next life will be that much harder because of it. If you nuke the whole planet today, then your next life will likely be one of a poorfag surviving in a radioactive hellhole. Because you don't know when or where you'll respawn, hurting or sabotaging anyone else (except people who themselves are a net negative for society) is potentially hurting yourself in the future.
Except most westerners (and lay Buddhists) get it backwards. There is no reincarnation because there is no self, no soul which would travel from body to body. It is an illusion.
Karma is volitional action, which gives rise to change in the world but which is itself conditioned on the world. So in Buddhism when someone talks about your past lives, they're talking about karma, not of the people who existed in the past. Likewise, in the future there will be more people, and some of the same people who exist already, who are reincarnated into their places by the present karma.
So it is not that people have karma, but karma has people - every moment, second after second in the present, you are re-born from the past and creating the future.
That's just semantics. Things are "real" because that's how it is convenient to consider them. It itself has predictive value. Past life and future life are called that way because that's what they effectively amount to. Saying that something doesn't exist because it's an illusion is nonsense, because illusions themselves do exist, the state of being an illusion only implies that they misrepresent the object they resemble.
Yes, the illusion exists, not the thing it represents.
A magic trick doesn't mean the coin actually teleported from the magician's hand to his pocket. In the same way, when a self appears somewhere, it does not mean it has traveled through time and space from some previous place - just that it appears there, because of the general causes and conditions.
The point is, it is not "your next life", because this one is just this. You won't wake up next time somewhere better or worse.
The trick is that when you pare this "self" down to its bare essential to find that little bit that identifies it to be unique and enables you to say this is the same self as something before, you find nothing. So what is the self that goes from one life to the next?
Instead, the self is created by the causes and conditions each time, which are conditioned by karma, which reveals the magician's trick: it's actually karma going from people to people. If you find yourself in a bad place, that is all of you that exist in a bad place across all time and all space, or a good place, or a neutral place - one is the tall body of Buddha, the other is the short body of Buddha.
>>3629749>Yes, the illusion exists, not the thing it represents.
At that point the distinction of illusion and reality, and reality and hyperreality, is just a matter of semantics. Reality is "real" for practical purposes in our daily life. If hyperreality is unchanging, then it's meaningless to observe and adjust to, unless you have literally nothing else to do.>A magic trick doesn't mean the coin actually teleported from the magician's hand to his pocket.
This is a false equivalency. The 'real' world doesn't work like a magic trick, that's exactly why we call it 'real'. Feel free to try and prove me wrong.>>3629750>The point is, it is not "your next life", because this one is just this. You won't wake up next time somewhere better or worse.
And I vehemently disagree with that. If I was capable of being born once, that means that some alignment of unknown causative agents lead up to that happening. Simple cause and effect that we observe everywhere else in the universe. Granted, I'll retain no memory of my current life, though it'll still be "me" in the sense that I see through the individual's eyes and experience qualia in the same way as I do now - but anyway, why couldn't the same alignment happen again? Denying that is as implausible as the claim that "there are no other lifeforms in the universe".
Excellent work kind sir
Saved from page 30