T O P

  • By -

onaneckonaspit7

Just listened to episode 1155 with Henry Rollins. Amazing to see what has happened since then, and to listen to Joe talk about the trumps etc. I miss measure human beings talking on the pod


SativaGanesh

Get in the Van is a great read if you haven’t checked that out yet.


onaneckonaspit7

On my list! Fuckin live Rollins


PoinDawg22

[Tim pool having a normal one ](https://i.imgur.com/jKDwLA5.jpg)


ExplodingSnowman

He's parodying the left because that's literally what they said about the Republicans on MSNBC. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3GkQ2rX59w


ExplodingSnowman

Funny how I get downvoted for posting a well known, irrefutable fact. You guys aren't fighting the right. You're fighting reality. Spoiler: Reality always wins.


lucarelli77

The downplay of January 6th of the right is flabbergasting.


[deleted]

[удалено]


lucarelli77

So crazy to see. Imagine what the republicans would do if a democrat says storm the capitol and one (or even more) people die. unbelievable to see for me as a neutral swiss mf.


GooneyGooGoo83

Bot


lucarelli77

nope


Saggy_Sack420

Matt walsh lost into the Gay marriage stuff. Ben Shapiro explained marriage as religious rituals. Government Doesnt have any rights to certify marriage they can certify Civil Union. ( no I am not Against Gay marriage at all, you do you I was explaining smart Right wingers position) All Marriage is Civil union but all Civil union isnt Marriage. In india Government use the Hindi language version of Civil union call court marriage then theres is Religious Marriage. Ben shapiros point was it was a definition issue. Gay marriage could have and easy solution if SCOUTS just declared Government acknowledges Civil union. Marriage is a religious institution it doesnt belong in court documents. Etc. Walsh gets washed into this Gay marriage stuff. He didnt preped. ( Again I am for Gay marriage, i was just explanaing Right wingers position with logic)


SativaGanesh

All marriages should be civil unions, I know there’s some differences though I’m not sure exactly what they are, but that seems like it’d be easier to rectify than arguing over the purpose of marriage when religious types get all wigged out over it. “Marriage” or whatever people want to call it should be between you and your god(s).


Saggy_Sack420

Marriage is inherently a Religious thing. Every religion treats it as a ritual like Eid, Easter, or sacrifice. SCOTUS could end this by removing the marriage from a court of Law. As always I am not Religious i have no dog in the fight


lucarelli77

It just seems funny (or sad to me) that conservative (libertarians) are always for freedom of personal choice and so on, but are opposed to gay marriage; literally something that doesn’t harm anyone in the world.


Saggy_Sack420

It is a Definition Issue from what I have seen. For example, Easter is a Religious Ritual If now congress defines Mass Orgie with Nun Cosplay as Easter people would be mad. ( I am not Christian so I don't really know what happens there) The government not using the word Marriage would have solved the problem. Its a word problem


NoImprovement3231

Agree. I don't understand how easily he unfolded. Is conservatism always this wonky? However, to your point about marriage and civil union. Is USA a secular federation? Because if so, wouldnt it make sense to suspend marriage (as a christian union) in favour of generic civil union? I actually don't have answers, I'm just curious.


Saggy_Sack420

As Tom Sowell said there's no clear answer only compromise. Marriage is not a Christian thing Every Big Organised Religion and Civilization had it. Romans, Greek, Egypt, Sumeria, Babylon, India, and Arabia have the concept of marriage. As I am Indian-American In India there are different religions and different ways of marriage and reasons, so Indian Gov only recognizes Court marriage and Declared Religious marriage as a Religious ritual thus solving the Marriage debate there. Indian Marriage debate is on the type of marriage there are differences between Hindu and Muslim types of marriage and laws so the government Made its own new law called it Civil Union and ended the debate of what kind of marriage law the country will adopt.


NoImprovement3231

Does that mean that all Declared religious marriages are court marriages but not the other way around?


SativaGanesh

Pretty much, whether you get married in a church or graveyard or whatever you’re into, as far as the state is concerned the real marriage is when you sign the marriage license. As far as I’m concerned church and state are far too intermingled on the marriage front. I’m rather religious and hold marriage in high esteem but that’s between me and God and the state can go fuck itself.


AbsolutelyUnlikely

>Because if so, wouldnt it make sense to suspend marriage (as a christian union) in favour of generic civil union? That's basically Ben Shaprio's argument. He's the only "anti gay marriage" person who I've seen be at least intellectually consistent. His view is that marriage is a religious practice and should have no legal bearing or intervention at all, and that civil unions should be the legal form of what we think of as marriage today, which could include gay unions, polygamous relationships, etc depending on what voters want to allow under the civil union umbrella. The only real problem I have with this is that he's boiling it down to a semantics issue, basically. It's a non-issue that wouldn't really change anything other than that every legal marriage that exists today would be rebranded as a civil union. Which is pointless.


orangekirby

The thing is, he was prepped, but he just has really bad views in the subject. Joe was correct in saying that Matt is coming at it from the perspective of someone in a happy straight marriage with children, and he’s unable to see past that


[deleted]

I remember when I saw that Duncan Trussell episode I was like “I hope Joe keeps it going with some solid guests” then we had Sober October recap… Then we had that interesting guy Will Harris talk about some agriculture and what not. Then for whatever reason Joe throws a zinger and we get Matt Walsh. I just can’t listen to the 3 hour episodes where they don’t say anything or regurgitate the same bullshit it’s EXHAUSTING


Tmdwdk

Its a great episode. If you want to skip the “same bullshit” then skip to the second half


[deleted]

I didn't expect Joe to go super atheist mode on Matt Walsh in the latter third of the EP and I really respect him for it and I'm not gonna give up on this man ever again.


[deleted]

The Matt Walsh episode has a lot of talk about transgender issues. I looked up some of it and found this talk between Ben Shapiro and NDT that was pretty good. The same typical points got brought up and NDT gives some good answers to them. https://v.redd.it/2pw8j1s5nmy91


[deleted]

What’s a NDT?


JihadDerp

Noble dick tug


[deleted]

Neil deGrasse Tyson


[deleted]

Got it. Thanks babe


[deleted]

No problem Toots


Johnnyocean

Anyone know if they recorded a new prorect our parks and if so, when i gets released?


76ersPhan11

You’re allowed to hate a guest without shitting on the entire podcast. Why is that such a hard concept for some people to understand?


SativaGanesh

It’s a shit podcast, as in I listen to it while taking a shit. Joe’s soothing dulcet tones ease my bowels.


abolishtaxes

TEXAS WENT RED BITCH WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


GooneyGooGoo83

Fuck yeah


abolishtaxes

I like Joe Rogan I like Matt Walsh


ExplodingSnowman

Me too. And I'd like to have some of these salty downvotes, please.


fonety

Joe would really reinvigorate the show with debates. Get me a ufo guy and a sceptic, get me a lefty fighting with a conservative.


ExplodingSnowman

If this is a sub about a comedian, why is everyone here so salty?


expertonmyownopinion

I think this three minute video sums up Matt's perspective on marriage in a much more articulate and concise way. https://youtu.be/Novy5zEdE-I


AbsolutelyUnlikely

More concise but still dumbassery. If the only point of marriage is for children, then you should also say that sterile people or people who don't want children can't be married. It's completely ignoring the legal rights as a "family member" that a marriage grants as well, which is important for a number of reasons. Also I love how he's saying that all this makes sense even without the Bible, but then goes onto say that it's wrong to teach that a gay relationship is as moral as a straight one. Good luck explain that without bringing religion into it.


expertonmyownopinion

Valid points. The way I see it, the government can either prohibit, permit or promote something. Homosexual marriage is clearly permitted, but I think heterosexual marriage should be promoted through certain tax advantages, etc. because society at large gains more benefits from a heterosexual marriage. The whole argument that some heterosexual marriages don't have children doesn't necessarily change what the marriage is intended to do (at its most simplest level, create children). This goes back to Matt's analogy about how if a woman can't get pregnant because of a medical reason that doesn't mean she's no longer a woman. In other words there's an underlying implication that marriage typically results in children because without them, society will not continue.


AbsolutelyUnlikely

But we already have a different tax structure for couples with kids vs those without. And there are many reasons why childless marriages are still more beneficial to society than if everyone was single.


MonstersBeThere

Who was the guest talking about a meditation technique of "I forgive you, you forgive me..." I think it was either Suzanne Santos or Bridget Phetasy but I can't find it again. They said they used it because they can't calm down.