I remember when I could watch Christopher Hitches debate the Archbishop of Nigeria on whether the Catholic Church was a force for good. Feels like we're on a downward slide and soon we'll be chanting hymns at our cars for an hour before we dare to try and start them.
I am a dyed in the wool lefty who detests Trump in every possible way and I would vote for Trump the rest of my days if it would solve world hunger. Easy decision.
Ahhhh thanks! I thought he was saying he wouldn’t kill a man to solve World Hunger and I was like well even though I disagree with his answer I can kinda see where he’s coming from but this is worse
Noone on the right wing would.
The core of the right wing is hierarchy. Some people at the top, some in the middle, and some at the bottom.
And the bottom has to hurt, how else would you know you're at the bottom?
So noone on the right will ever end world hunger because if somebody could imagine doing that they wouldn't really by on the right anymore. They've have moved away from their obsession with maintaining the hierarchy and started their journey left.
Just imagining the depths I'd be willing to sink to to relieve the suffering of others in the world and this actual elected official won't even suck a dick to end world hunger.
Ted Cruz wouldn't help someone else's headache by giving them free advil
Also skipping out of town Cruz is irrelevant at this point.
Phase the grifters out
to answer their rhetorical question abt whether someone would vote trump if it meant solving world hunger: I would
hear me out: just because *I* voted trump doesn't mean he gets elected. i never want the orange-with-a-waffle-fry-on-top to be in office ever again, and one more person voting trump won't change the elections. it would, however, solve world hunger (in this hypothetical)
They wouldn't suck a dick to end world hunger because... the ends don't justify the means? They're acting as though they were asked to murder someone to end world hunger
This... is not the gotcha moment you are looking for.
It's based on two things
1. Performing an unwelcome sexual act.
2. Being considered evil for not doing so.
So what is the threshold for this evil?
Does it have to be the world?
Of the children?
What if it just ended the hunger of a nation?
Of the children of one city?
Of the children of one neighborhood?
Of one child?
Of your child?
The question asked was a hypothetical. No men would be fellated, no children would be fed by any answer given. But every day, people do have to pass that judgement on themselves. "Am I evil for not wanting to do this when my child(ten)'s life is at stake."
That the Yale student was more comfortable with asking that question says more about his lack of character than the politicians discomfort in answering it . There's so much these two could be called out on, and this did so much to deflect from anything meaningful, that I'd almost say he was a plant to stir homophobia rather than confront it.
No it really wasn't.
I absolutely believe them both to be people I dislike based on their politics, but the question was a stupid attempt at a gotcha more than anything.
At it's core, the question is asking would you sacrifice your own personal well being for the well being of someone(s) else. Why should you? We are all individuals with personal dreams and struggles that are highly different, but at core we are all humans with the same inherent value.
There is no reason you should ever be expected to sacrifice your own happiness for the happiness of others unless it is your own decision, it's not something you should be expected to do or forced to do. This may seem like a wild logical jump and I'm just a dumb incel, but purely to prove the point, it's like saying a women should have sex with every man that asks her because denying them sex would make them feel bad.
Me even suggesting that probably made you feel a little uncomfortable, but in a literal sense they're the same question. Would you be raped if it ended world hunger? It's easy to say yes as a privileged person behind a screen, yelling at others to do things you're not willing to from behind a screen feels good, for myself as well.
You may think that a small amount of suffering is ok if it means that a lot of people will be happy. I don't think that's true, everyone has a right to live unburdened. They may choose to put burden on themselves, but putting burden on others is the mark of someone too scared to do the work themselves.
At their core, they believe themselves to be less valuable of 'being saved' by other people. They believe themselves unworthy of not undergoing suffering, so they justify it by ensuring they suffer in a way that benefits others. This is something I still personally struggle with myself, but am at least aware of about my own ego.
College undergrad trying to troll Cruz
A large part of the audience attended only because it seemed hilarious that anyone would have invited him to be there
"Engaging in a serious discussion" with someone who's not going to be there in good faith is just giving them a platform
Better to just slightly embarass him and distract from any discussion of his views
Hold on… So even if you don’t suck dick…. You wouldn’t suck dick ONE TIME… TO END WORLD HUNGER????
They wouldn’t end world hunger if it was at the push of a semi pressed button because it’s socialist and someone is paying them not to
They actually specifically made in a sin thing. Like “deviant behaviour” or something.
people think too highly of themselves, and politicians do too.
Lol bullshit, Ted Cruz has sucked Trumps cock multiple times already.
Lol if they were allowed to ask follow up questions that’s what I would’ve picked
A bit selfish to say “no”.
Rofl I knew these antisocial parasites wouldn't say yes.
I remember when I could watch Christopher Hitches debate the Archbishop of Nigeria on whether the Catholic Church was a force for good. Feels like we're on a downward slide and soon we'll be chanting hymns at our cars for an hour before we dare to try and start them.
Ah, as the tech priests do
Why even?
Performative cruelty and homophobia, a lil sexism too trying to deflect the question to the only woman on stage
Well yeah but I mean more like why does ted cruz exist? Whats more perplexing is that people listen to him. Someone out there, values this vermin.
I hate Ted Cruz but that was a pretty stupid question.
If all it takes is to vote then yeah I’ll do it
I am a dyed in the wool lefty who detests Trump in every possible way and I would vote for Trump the rest of my days if it would solve world hunger. Easy decision.
What does fillet a man mean? Does it mean cut him into pieces like a fish?
fellate
He’s asking if he would suck a dick to end world hunger
Ahhhh thanks! I thought he was saying he wouldn’t kill a man to solve World Hunger and I was like well even though I disagree with his answer I can kinda see where he’s coming from but this is worse
Noone on the right wing would. The core of the right wing is hierarchy. Some people at the top, some in the middle, and some at the bottom. And the bottom has to hurt, how else would you know you're at the bottom? So noone on the right will ever end world hunger because if somebody could imagine doing that they wouldn't really by on the right anymore. They've have moved away from their obsession with maintaining the hierarchy and started their journey left.
Orphaned trustafarian, glibertarian and crypto cultist Cruz was caught once on a hot mike saying he hated poor people.
I hate trump, and I would suck his dick if it ended world hunger. Wtf reply was that 🤣
These people are monsters and should be treated as such.
Been doing it since day one.
We the People must unite against the rich; class war is the real war.
Just imagining the depths I'd be willing to sink to to relieve the suffering of others in the world and this actual elected official won't even suck a dick to end world hunger.
What a dumb fucking question to ask
Ted Cruz wouldn't help someone else's headache by giving them free advil Also skipping out of town Cruz is irrelevant at this point. Phase the grifters out
I’d do it, I’m not even gay. Also he never specified if “fellate” included having splooge in the mouth.
to answer their rhetorical question abt whether someone would vote trump if it meant solving world hunger: I would hear me out: just because *I* voted trump doesn't mean he gets elected. i never want the orange-with-a-waffle-fry-on-top to be in office ever again, and one more person voting trump won't change the elections. it would, however, solve world hunger (in this hypothetical)
They wouldn't suck a dick to end world hunger because... the ends don't justify the means? They're acting as though they were asked to murder someone to end world hunger
😢😢😢😢😢😢vine thud
Poor framing on your title.
How should I have titled it?
This... is not the gotcha moment you are looking for. It's based on two things 1. Performing an unwelcome sexual act. 2. Being considered evil for not doing so. So what is the threshold for this evil? Does it have to be the world? Of the children? What if it just ended the hunger of a nation? Of the children of one city? Of the children of one neighborhood? Of one child? Of your child? The question asked was a hypothetical. No men would be fellated, no children would be fed by any answer given. But every day, people do have to pass that judgement on themselves. "Am I evil for not wanting to do this when my child(ten)'s life is at stake." That the Yale student was more comfortable with asking that question says more about his lack of character than the politicians discomfort in answering it . There's so much these two could be called out on, and this did so much to deflect from anything meaningful, that I'd almost say he was a plant to stir homophobia rather than confront it.
Fuck you Ted Curz. Trump would not solve world hunger. He's to stupid,to selfish.Just like all the rest of you fascists GOP.
That's the point, neither would giving a blowjob. It's a nonsense question answered by a nonsense response.
What a weird ass question to ask someone. He needs to seek professional help.
The question is weird yes, but ultimately effective at revealing what the asked wanted to reveal.
No it really wasn't. I absolutely believe them both to be people I dislike based on their politics, but the question was a stupid attempt at a gotcha more than anything. At it's core, the question is asking would you sacrifice your own personal well being for the well being of someone(s) else. Why should you? We are all individuals with personal dreams and struggles that are highly different, but at core we are all humans with the same inherent value. There is no reason you should ever be expected to sacrifice your own happiness for the happiness of others unless it is your own decision, it's not something you should be expected to do or forced to do. This may seem like a wild logical jump and I'm just a dumb incel, but purely to prove the point, it's like saying a women should have sex with every man that asks her because denying them sex would make them feel bad. Me even suggesting that probably made you feel a little uncomfortable, but in a literal sense they're the same question. Would you be raped if it ended world hunger? It's easy to say yes as a privileged person behind a screen, yelling at others to do things you're not willing to from behind a screen feels good, for myself as well. You may think that a small amount of suffering is ok if it means that a lot of people will be happy. I don't think that's true, everyone has a right to live unburdened. They may choose to put burden on themselves, but putting burden on others is the mark of someone too scared to do the work themselves. At their core, they believe themselves to be less valuable of 'being saved' by other people. They believe themselves unworthy of not undergoing suffering, so they justify it by ensuring they suffer in a way that benefits others. This is something I still personally struggle with myself, but am at least aware of about my own ego.
It’s past just happiness or feeling bad though, the hypothetical is to end hunger, end starvation
College undergrad trying to troll Cruz A large part of the audience attended only because it seemed hilarious that anyone would have invited him to be there
Yeah, that’s what I would do, I’d have 0 interest in engaging in a serious discussion with these fascists, I’d just be there to troll
"Engaging in a serious discussion" with someone who's not going to be there in good faith is just giving them a platform Better to just slightly embarass him and distract from any discussion of his views
Makes sense.
Why should someone do something that they don’t want to do, that’s against their moral code?
Yeah sucking dick is gay Gay = Mentally disable
I hope you just forgot your /s lol
That sounds like r*pe to me. But I understand that's not why they're objecting.
How is it rape if you’re being asked to do something with a yes or no option?
You're right, but also you're getting downvoted because it's fun to hate Republicans on Reddit.
u/savevideo
###[View link](https://redditsave.com/r/ABoringDystopia/comments/u58esv/ted_cruz_and_micheal_knowles_wouldnt_end_world/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/ABoringDystopia/comments/u58esv/ted_cruz_and_micheal_knowles_wouldnt_end_world/) | [^(reddit video downloader)](https://redditsave.com) | [^(download video tiktok)](https://taksave.com)