If the chosen one who saves the world is born from rape yet rises above his dark origin...

If the chosen one who saves the world is born from rape yet rises above his dark origin, would it be an evil act for a time traveler to prevent the initial rape?

There's no such thing as rape.

>Neutral good means weak
I want this meme to die. So many people think this, and I have no idea why.

What about the meme that Veeky Forums needs at least one thread about rape on the board at all times

This.
Being Neutral Good just means you don't value law or freedom as much as good.
How is that wrong or weak?

that's good. It can stay

well, does neutral good people even lift?

It has right now - one that mentioned accident magical realms

go back to

What it has to do with /pol/? As far as I know, rape isn't politics

well, stuff like "Women deserve rape", " she was asking for it", "you can't rape your wife" is stuff that you'd find there,

So if someone sees something like that especially when it's the only content of the post, they'd assume the other person wandered out of /pol/

It is more like /r9k/. I've browsed /pol/ until some months ago and this kind of opinion is uncommon there
>you can't rape your wife
This is true though.

>trolls actually pretend to believe this

Wouldn't that be the definition of a Neutral act?
>Prevent a rape (Good)
>essentially kill someone by preventing their conception (Evil)
>Rape is unlawful, you uphold the Law
>But use questionable means (Chaos)
I'm pretty sure from the objective morality standpoint, that's a Neutral act.

You're mixing your boogeymen up. That's more like /r9k/

/r9k/ and /pol/ have a notable bit of overlap in users. obviously not everyone, but it's visibly there.

also you can infact rape your wife.

>also you can infact rape your wife.

if it legally counts as rape depends upon the law in the area.
Of course morallity wise is a separate thing.

Well ya lots of shit is legal in certain places but it doesn't make it ok or no longer a thing. If murder is legal it's still murder.

/r9k/ is literally the exact OPPOSITE of /pol/.
It's a bunch of brown kids complaining that girls chose white guys over them on tinder. Half the threads on /r9k/ are about bitching about this.

Murder is an unlawful killing, numbnuts. It's not possible for murder to be legal because it's specifically a kind of killing that is illegal.

I'm pretty sure you get white guys on /r9k/ as well. NEET isn't a single country phenomenon.

That stuff shows up in /pol/, id say 90% of the time there is a thread in the catalog complaing about something like "white women are being degenerated"

>if you are a NEET, you must be both /pol/ or /r9k/ and if you either of these two then you are a NEET and the other one
No everyone you dislike is part of some giant strawman dude.

i didn't say they all were that.

calm down /pol/ defense force

Of course there is overlap, every single board has overlap with every board besides /soc/ which apparently has the lowest crossposter rate of any board, thankfully.
You have a really fundamental misunderstanding about how board cultures mesh. Boards like /k/, /v/, /int/ and /a/ have far larger overlaps with /pol/ than /r9k/. I get you wanna push your "all my boogeymen aren't separate people but actually one solidified group" meme, but get some perspective and actually learn general board culture before spouting shit. /r9k/ is more flagrant misogyny and mgtow shit while /pol/ is more of "they're salvageable and worth trying to save". I don't agree with either of them but this world view you have is pathetic. There's tons of flavors of antisocial neets and you wanna try to bunch them together for some reasons.

To be honest ethnic dudes tend to have it quite hard with being minorities and so generally having a small dating pool while their female counterparts generally have more success with white dudes and living in a mostly white society make them more attracted to them.
It's still entitled sure, but I can still understand some of the angst altough like usual the /r9k/ ones are overracting to bad things that can happen to everyone.

>I get you wanna push your "all my boogeymen aren't separate people but actually one solidified group" meme,
thats a strawman, or an exaggeration.

I didn't say "Theyr all teh same"., I said theres an overlap.

Overlap doesnt mean "ALL IS ONE".

/pol/ has a large variety of viewpoints. which tend to be offensive, if you were to state them on public television.
It's got a lot of wierd viewpoints as well, like the periodically appearing LGBT nazi mega thread.


/pol/ often has "misoginistic threads", like complaining about roastises, or we need tradition women back etc.

There's no moral question here, the duty of a wife is to provide pleasure to her husband. She can't just refuse it.
Not really a troll. I've never meet one person that thought it was possible to rape your own wife

Pretty much the only thing all /pol/tards have in common is the belief that only their ideology represent the board's ideals

It used to be more unified before the US elections and before the Gamergate

Time Travel is evil.

It is the alignment of militant pacifists who refuse to kill or hurt anything.

>I've never meet one person that thought it was possible to rape your own wife
That's kinda weird, the idea that you can't rape your wife is pretty rare and pretty much only very conservative religious people think that because the whole idea comes from the Bible.
Do you live in a very conservative and religious place? Maybe outside the west? At least it's very unusual to think that where I live.
>There's no moral question here, the duty of a wife is to provide pleasure to her husband. She can't just refuse it.
Even if a wife refused to provide pleasure to her husband, would it be right for him to physically force himself on her?

And what leads you to that conclusion?

Empirical testing.

Y are generally X but not all X are Y.

>That's kinda weird, the idea that you can't rape your wife is pretty rare and pretty much only very conservative religious people think that because the whole idea comes from the Bible.
Source?
>Do you live in a very conservative and religious place? Maybe outside the west? At least it's very unusual to think that where I live.
Not really. It's just hard to understand why somebody would marry for no reason
>Even if a wife refused to provide pleasure to her husband, would it be right for him to physically force himself on her?
Obviously.

Hello, Ahmed.

Bait or retarded. Move on.

This, lol

Not really. It's a ancient rule.
No point of marrying if you want to keep your life the exactly the same way it was when you were sibgle

>it's either a sexless marriage or physically force yourself on your wife even the few times she really refuses to have sex, nothing in between.

You all point out he's a troll, yet you continue to feed him.

May I ask an alignment question here?

It's a DnD character but it came up at the end of a battle. I negotiated the surrender of a wizard that was murdering children. My plan was to have her turn over the hostages she hid somewhere in a small city and then kill her. I gave my word that she would not be harmed and she could escape the town undetected so long as the children were recovered in good condition.

The DM ask what my alignment was after I said I attacked her once the guards got the kids. It's a fighter with an alignment of Neutral Good but it got me thinking about it.

Is it more a CN thing or a NE? Thoughts?

This is why alignment is stupid. Yes, you killed someone you didn't necessarily need to kill, but you had reason to believe they would continue to harm people in the future, and children at that. Neutral Good sounds fine to me.

its evil based on intent

so if the guy knows the chosen one is born from the rape, preventing it is coincidentally good because its preventing a rape but intentionally evil because hes preventing the chosen hero from being born dooming the world in the process

if the guy doesnt know the chosen one will be born from it then hes just being a good guy preventing a rape but unknowingly fucking up and dooming the world

like a hero accidently setting a demon free from a cage his loved one is also trapped in

samefagging is strong

I like your thinking.

Not lawful for sure.
But it doesn't have anything to do with good and evil, unless the evil wizard was presented as redeemable.

go back to

You can, but still illegal. And don't give me any "mawital wape" autism. Rape is rape. If you coerce, trick, or force someone into sex, you are a rapist.

Rape is just seizing the means of reproduction so It is pol

but the BLURRED LINES