>>455397
>c h r i s t c u c k s
I was the biggest anti-Christoid poster for the longest time, but even I'm starting to have second thoughts about it. not that I believe in it, but you need to have some method to manipulate the nigger cattle into doing what you want. like having morals, having children, what compelling reason is there to command people to do these things? individuals are motivated by individual self-interest, morals benefit the collective at the expense of the individual. "you have to do what I say because I say so" is less compelling and more reliant on power imbalance than "you have to do so because this book says so and if you don't then you're gonna burn forever after you die". the latter historically worked to get the masses of people to behave in an acceptable matter
now if I could make my own religion and make everybody believe in it, it would be very different from Christianity. it would be basically hardcore white supremacism/antisemitism, ruthless in-group prioritization, male chauvinism, women would be breeding chattel, all sexualization of the anus strictly prohibited. the biggest problem with Christianity is that it's not racist, and the second problem is that it's not antisemitic enough. but at least it's a book you can throw at a woman and say "this book says you have to shut the fuck up and make my babies, or you're gonna burn". otherwise, what can you say? "shut the fuck up and make my babies, or I'm gonna hit you"? that's not viable with the way the laws are right now, and even if the laws enabled that then the above paragraph applies- it's just more reasonable and persuasive to outsource the demand to "the book says so, or you're gonna burn". "because God says so" is better than "because I say so"- even a kid will ridicule their parent for saying the latter because it's obviously irrational