>>511121202
Guess you autosaged my thread, feminist.
Not that there's more than 12 or 13 people to talk to on this silo'd node.

Why do christians think it is an honour an a privledge to the programmers that they choose to use other people's programming work for free? And that because they, christian feminists, use Linux: they get to fire/ban whatever programmer they wish to fire. (who worked for free)

For being pedos, for not being millstoned to death by Jesus.
Why do christians get to control the hacker hobby?

YHWH allows child brides.
Jesus allows feminists, and hates males. And called YHWH the adversary (satan).

>>81891548
He also did the reloadable weapons code. Again ANOTHER piece of code I use EVERY time I add another weapon.

You people are pieces of SHIT.
I WILL kill you.

Your side killed Ian of Debian.
I will kill you.
xcct

>>105976281 >>105976221 (You)
>they hate Jeremy too
>LOL, clearly they don't. They didn't ban him, they banned you.
They fired him from his job, at the behest of lunduke and you seething Christian feminists.

>Stop and think about that for a minute. YOU are so obnoxious that you lose a popularity contest with a convicted child rapist. YOU are so much of a failure that they'd rather have the convicted child rapist than YOU.
I've been being banned from #debian for 20 years, newfaggot.
Since 2003.

>lol. lmao, even.
I'm going to kill you for opposing child brides, and for supporting women's rights and feminism. YHWH allows child brides.

>>510881165
>have you maybe thought of not being a fucking pedophile? like it's that easy just don't be a pedophile and defend other pedophiles and you too can reap the benefits of not being a degenerate pedophile >how is this hard to understand?

Why do we have to obey you? Paedophiles wrote the C compiler underwrighting all of Free Software:

RMS wrote the free C compiler. (and the free editor) (and the free *nix tools)
>"The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia" also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally--but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness."
>
>RMS on June 28th, 2003 https://stallman.org/archives/2003-mar-jun.html
>
>--------------------------
>
>"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing. "
>
>RMS on June 5th, 2006) https://stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html#05%20June%202006%20(Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party
>
>--------------------------
>
>" There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children.
>
>Granted, children may not dare say no to an older relative, or may not realize they could say no; in that case, even if they do not overtly object, the relationship may still feel imposed to them. That's not willing participation, it's imposed participation, a different issue. "
>
>RMS on Jan 4th, 2013) https://stallman.org/archives/2013-jan-apr.html#04_January_2013_(Pedophilia