>>7651804
No anon if i say something that aims to criticize the subject and someone comes at me calling me an """"anti""", it's 100% sure they're feeling personally attacked because they make the thing their own personality.

Maybe you should stop trying to portray me as someone who is incapable of actual criticism.
>but do you not understand
I do and have said it multiple times that they make the thing their personality, which makes them NPCs, bots, cattle, normies, but again, how the fuck is that my problem? You're just asking me to repeat myself.

>he actually doesn't know what common decency is
>missing the context this hard
Common decency isn't culture, Anon.
Or do you know of some widespread culture that enables and encourages people to have sex on the street or otherwise be a nuisance to others for their own self-satisfaction and is totally seen as normal?
Just because narcissistic and egomaniacal behavior is now widespread due to social media brain rot and asylums getting abolished and society being dictated by mentally ill animals by virtue of majority, doesn't mean it's normal or sane.
>the rest
Ok?
>I am for people being able to refuse to enter contracts with others for any reason
Interesting, because that's part of what common decency is about.
You don't want to have religion or otherwise cults or ideologies forced upon you, and it's your right to not get swarmed by it in public places. That's why western schools got rid of religion classes or were made optional.
But the tone changes when this same rule is attempted to get applied to any matter of sex and sexuality, because then it's
>"le puritans"
and
>"but the puritans did it now its our turn"
If common decency was alive and well, you wouldn't have faggots making a scene because people who don't align with them didn't want to take their money.
Or the entire alphabet soup trying to force their shit everywhere and jail anyone who dares not welcome their cheeks spread wide open.