DONATOR ONLY PREMIUM CONTENT - For more information on donator levels click here



If your donator status is incorrect, please contact Michael at with the relevant information.


Freedomain Radio Amazon Affiliate Links: United States - Canada - United Kingdom

Welcome to Freedomain Radio Message Board

If you're interested in joining the philosophical discussion, click "sign in" or "create account" on the right of the page. If you're creating a new account, please be sure to include an explanation as to why you're interested in joining the message board community. This verification requirement is included to cut down on possible spam accounts.


If you have supported Freedomain Radio financially and would like immediate access to the message board - or - your donation status is incorrect, please contact Michael at with your Paypal email/Bitcoin address/etc as well as your board account name and the situation will be addressed ASAP.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

-5 Poor

About Erwin

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

193 profile views
  1. Word of advice to all of you, this is what happens when men fail to put women in their place. It sends a signal to the women that there are no men around, so the women have to look for men elsewhere (Muslims in this case). @Soulfire who will you run to when you are being raped by these people? The same people you have equated with IQ 85 cousin f---ing rapists?
  2. Why? Hint: she's a woman.
  3. This is very much like a "guns kill people" argument. Government can do nothing without the people behind it. Even a government program to cut government programs? Even a government program to stop our genocide? Advocating for coercion does not violate the NAP, if coerced against first. Are you suggesting that the response to coercion should never be coercion? Cuz that has no basis in the NAP...
  4. As in, the use of force (whether or not through government) is perfectly NAP-compliant in self-defense (i.e. as a means to defend against coercion).
  5. The ruler's demand cannot be the cause of the mining, if the mining came first.
  6. So you want to wait to get a job and wait before having kids? The timeline doesn't add up here, does she want kids at 34, 35?
  7. Assuming she is in her early 20s, is there a reason she can't wait for you to get a full time job ?
  8. No, but I don't know if my case is common... To this day, the very thought of my dad gives me absolute horror. Often, I would try to signal to adults to help me, but they would look at me with disdain as it got interpreted as me being ungrateful. People just assumed that because my dad is a good dad because he's my dad. Just look at the child's behavior and body language. If you see a terrified child, then it's probably better to leave it to the cops.
  9. Actually, you're right and we're in agreement here. Poor choice of words on my part. I neglected to specify ""all muslims who joined voluntarily" (which is what the original example is about). Of course. In-group preference is perfectly natural.
  10. I'm not sure what you mean by "on an intellectual level". How do you reconcile intellectual agreement with practical agreement? If there is agreement in practice, shouldn't your theory be revised to more accurately model practical evidence? The way I see it, no one gets to sign a contract, and say "well hey... I know I signed, but I'm really a moderate! I don't recognize clause IV, and I didn't mean to pay $500 per month literally". Yet we tolerate this line of reasoning for Muslims. Why?
  11. All Muslims ever. At minimum, they implicitly promote aggression against your brother. At worst, they were the perpetrators. Actually, when you put it in those terms, I'll amend what I said. I wouldn't punch him if I were in a country with a low probability of being invaded by him. That's assault. Well of course, we can do something about it. Send them back to the Sahara. Likewise
  12. The NAP doesn't apply under coercion. So by definition, the use of government is perfectly NAP-compliant if it used against itself, or some other coercive force.
  13. Ok, thank you. So to come back to what you said: Given the definition we've agreed on, collectives are entities, given that they exist and have identity. Am I missing something?
  14. I see. Are you treating "Peaceful Islam" as a separate set of doctrine? If so, I would disagree there on the basis that "Peaceful Islam" is a rejection of violent practices, and by definition, not a doctrine at all. That leaves every other type of Islam, the least radical of which is Shia Islam and they're still pretty brutal. Not necessarily toward you. Towards whoever is being aggressed. For example, a Soviet citizen has every justification to revolt even violently against the USSR, because that Soviet was being aggressed. But if Stalin were to walk down the block, I don't get to just punch him. However, it would be horrible of me to associate with Stalin. Let's say Stalin wants to eat at my restaurant, I would be helping to keep a mass murderer alive (which helps him continue mass murder). No, I fully recognize that there are those who call themselves Muslim, but don't really practice it. I'm just saying that even identifying with it is immoral.