It’s funny how people will call others entitled when the world is based on entitlement.

Aladin

Aladin

Fuchsia
Joined
Jul 20, 2022
Posts
12,017
Reputation
13,997
When a child, literal pedophiles want to molest small children, but tax dollars are used to fund police to prevent this.

So most people feel entitled to not being raped as kids and an alternative reality is viewed as proposterous.
 
Last edited:
  • +1
  • Hmm...
  • JFL
Reactions: Wexilarious, McSkziofren, Proex and 2 others

. Protection of children is not a form of "entitlement," but a basic human right.​


Children are universally recognized—under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and domestic laws in most countries—as having a right to safety, protection, and nurturing environments. This is not a matter of entitlement or privilege; it's a foundational ethical and legal standard.


2. The existence of threats does not diminish the legitimacy of protection.​


Just because predators exist doesn't mean society's response (such as funding law enforcement or child protection services) is an overreaction or creates unrealistic expectations. Quite the opposite—it’s a moral imperative to shield the vulnerable from harm.


3. “Alternative childhoods” where children are not protected are not simply ‘different’—they are harmful.​


To say it's “preposterous” to imagine a world where children aren’t protected is not narrow-minded; it’s a recognition of the trauma, exploitation, and developmental harm that results from neglect or abuse. Societies reject those models for very real, evidence-based reasons.


4. Framing child protection as entitlement distorts the purpose of civil society.​


Social contracts exist to balance freedom with safety. Funding police or social services isn’t about coddling children—it’s about maintaining order and decency. Suggesting people “feel entitled” to a safe upbringing is like saying people “feel entitled” to clean water or education. These are not luxuries.
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Dirlewanger333 and Aladin

. Protection of children is not a form of "entitlement," but a basic human right.​


Children are universally recognized—under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and domestic laws in most countries—as having a right to safety, protection, and nurturing environments. This is not a matter of entitlement or privilege; it's a foundational ethical and legal standard.


2. The existence of threats does not diminish the legitimacy of protection.​


Just because predators exist doesn't mean society's response (such as funding law enforcement or child protection services) is an overreaction or creates unrealistic expectations. Quite the opposite—it’s a moral imperative to shield the vulnerable from harm.


3. “Alternative childhoods” where children are not protected are not simply ‘different’—they are harmful.​


To say it's “preposterous” to imagine a world where children aren’t protected is not narrow-minded; it’s a recognition of the trauma, exploitation, and developmental harm that results from neglect or abuse. Societies reject those models for very real, evidence-based reasons.


4. Framing child protection as entitlement distorts the purpose of civil society.​


Social contracts exist to balance freedom with safety. Funding police or social services isn’t about coddling children—it’s about maintaining order and decency. Suggesting people “feel entitled” to a safe upbringing is like saying people “feel entitled” to clean water or education. These are not luxuries.
Where is this from?
 
  • JFL
Reactions: JasGews69x
Pinkwell explaining why 12 year old girls are hot
 
  • +1
Reactions: Proex
Entitlement is doing something under a bad justification. You can't say that the world is built on entitlement without first defining which ethical system youre basing entitlement off of. This post makes no sense
 
Pinkwell explaining why 12 year old girls are hot
Photo 2025 05 26 13 05 30
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Eltrē, Proex and Looks over NT
Entitlement is doing something under a bad justification. You can't say that the world is built on entitlement without first defining which ethical system youre basing entitlement off of. This post makes no sense
“Incel are entitled”

Is that just a bs statement?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Dirlewanger333
this bloke has been posting the same fucking shit for like 6 plus years while he is in his 30s. And still don't understand that law and so called cucked gov. according to his words is not his biggest problem, but looks.
 
  • Hmm...
Reactions: Aladin
this bloke has been posting the same fucking shit for like 6 plus years while he is in his 30s. And still don't understand that law and so called cucked gov. according to his words is not his biggest problem, but looks.
Somehow you believe I am unaware looks are my problem?

Also who’s alt are you? Rupert pumkin?
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Eltrē
When a child, literal pedophiles want to molest small children, but tax dollars are used to fund police to prevent this.

So most people feel entitled to not being raped as kids and an alternative reality is viewed as proposterous.
What is tax doller
 
It’s not a “justification” for something. Incels are just upset about no sex.
A justification is the reason someone does something. You claim that incels do things because they are upset that they dont have sex. This claim doesn't say whether you believe this is good or bad
 
I think most incels are just upset about no sex and want sex. That’s it.
“Incel are entitled”
Holy motherfucking shit stop putting words in my mouth.
To be entitled, you must do an action. Further, you say that incels are just upset about no sex. Henceforth, the incel justification for some action is that they have no sex.
No I don’t.
I meant why do you think so or not so
 
To be entitled, you must do an action. Further, you say that incels are just upset about no sex. Henceforth, the incel justification for some action is that they have no sex.
incels don’t do actions incels are rotters.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top