|
makaveli8x8
Stranger

Registered: 02/28/06
Posts: 21,636
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: eehoo]
#22470643 - 11/03/15 11:42 AM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
eehoo said: Never believe any man
thats sexist
--------------------
  We were sent to hell for eternity Ø h® We play on earth to pass the time Over-population the root of all Evil-brings the Elites Closer to the gates.
|
eehoo
Stranger


Registered: 09/26/15
Posts: 711
Last seen: 8 years, 18 days
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: makaveli8x8]
#22470657 - 11/03/15 11:46 AM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
makaveli8x8 said:
Quote:
eehoo said: Never believe any man
thats sexist
Same goes for her/xe/purple/yellow/pink. Sorry I excluded green I am so very sorry to be inconsiderate to green
--------------------
|
Srirachi
Mold Hand



Registered: 10/18/05
Posts: 11,411
Loc: Fare Thee Well.
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: Turtletotem]
#22470687 - 11/03/15 11:54 AM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Turtletotem said: What do you think about all this other stuff that popped up in this thread, tho? I mean, getting butthurt that gays marry eachother is worse than wrongly calling someone a homophobe, in my opinion.
Well it's been interesting. What interests me the most is that a great number of people are unable to understand that their unwillingness to abandon the practice of just saying "Your opinion isn't as good as mine" stifles progress more than any belief or religion or anything else.
I'm extremely tolerant of other people, and as a Libertarian I believe that no one has any right to inhibit another's right to anything if no harm is being done. So I could care less about gay marriage- but I do care that people who feel their religious freedom is being taken away from them by the government are branded 'homophobe' as a way to silence them and further abrogate their rights.
It borders on incomprehensible to me that people don't believe it is a double-standard to say that the definition of the word marriage shouldn't matter to Christians (or whoever) while simultaneously saying that homosexuals are being denied some right by not redefining the word. It's also interesting that people interpret that example as the point of my argument when I've clearly stated that it is the double standard that I'm talking about and not the definition of the word. I suspect that it's just easier to focus on the minutia than the crux.
I still contend that the GLBT community would make more progress by respecting standing traditions instead of demanding that the other 90% of the population change to accommodate them.
I especially liked how, when I made a clearly hyperbolic example about gay people getting to claim real property in the same way they are claiming intellectual property by redefining marriage to the chagrin of many people, someone fixated on that. It's a typical asshole way of trying to silence someone who has a position you can't actually attack - create an argument you can win by taking a small point out of context and saying it's stupid to say what the person never said in the first place.
So to give you the short answer I should have gone with in the first place-
I think there were some great points made so far. The question on whether I support marriage between two atheists was one I'd never had to consider before, because by and large atheists just go to the courthouse and get married - unless they're gay.
I don't find it discouraging at all that several people insist on using carefully washed hate language wrapped in the robes of equality to reiterate that they believe homosexuals should receive special privileges. Just as there's no point in talking about acceptance of black people to a white supremacist, there's no point in talking about respecting all peoples' values to people who only want to hear their own opinions coming out of other people's mouths.
|
ReposadoXochipilli
Here, there, inbetween



Registered: 08/30/05
Posts: 7,501
Loc: Sand and sunshine
Last seen: 19 days, 21 hours
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: Srirachi]
#22470750 - 11/03/15 12:05 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Srirachi said:
I don't find it discouraging at all that several people insist on using carefully washed hate language wrapped in the robes of equality to reiterate that they believe homosexuals should receive special privileges. Just as there's no point in talking about acceptance of black people to a white supremacist, there's no point in talking about respecting all peoples' values to people who only want to hear their own opinions coming out of other people's mouths.
/thread
--------------------
|
eehoo
Stranger


Registered: 09/26/15
Posts: 711
Last seen: 8 years, 18 days
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: Srirachi]
#22470813 - 11/03/15 12:16 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Srirachi said:
Quote:
Turtletotem said: What do you think about all this other stuff that popped up in this thread, tho? I mean, getting butthurt that gays marry eachother is worse than wrongly calling someone a homophobe, in my opinion.
Well it's been interesting. What interests me the most is that a great number of people are unable to understand that their unwillingness to abandon the practice of just saying "Your opinion isn't as good as mine" stifles progress more than any belief or religion or anything else.
I'm extremely tolerant of other people, and as a Libertarian I believe that no one has any right to inhibit another's right to anything if no harm is being done. So I could care less about gay marriage- but I do care that people who feel their religious freedom is being taken away from them by the government are branded 'homophobe' as a way to silence them and further abrogate their rights.
It borders on incomprehensible to me that people don't believe it is a double-standard to say that the definition of the word marriage shouldn't matter to Christians (or whoever) while simultaneously saying that homosexuals are being denied some right by not redefining the word. It's also interesting that people interpret that example as the point of my argument when I've clearly stated that it is the double standard that I'm talking about and not the definition of the word. I suspect that it's just easier to focus on the minutia than the crux.
I still contend that the GLBT community would make more progress by respecting standing traditions instead of demanding that the other 90% of the population change to accommodate them.
I especially liked how, when I made a clearly hyperbolic example about gay people getting to claim real property in the same way they are claiming intellectual property by redefining marriage to the chagrin of many people, someone fixated on that. It's a typical asshole way of trying to silence someone who has a position you can't actually attack - create an argument you can win by taking a small point out of context and saying it's stupid to say what the person never said in the first place.
So to give you the short answer I should have gone with in the first place-
I think there were some great points made so far. The question on whether I support marriage between two atheists was one I'd never had to consider before, because by and large atheists just go to the courthouse and get married - unless they're gay.
I don't find it discouraging at all that several people insist on using carefully washed hate language wrapped in the robes of equality to reiterate that they believe homosexuals should receive special privileges. Just as there's no point in talking about acceptance of black people to a white supremacist, there's no point in talking about respecting all peoples' values to people who only want to hear their own opinions coming out of other people's mouths.
People get a dopamine rush from defending beliefs. Logic is irrelevant in most circumstance. Like I said before, this is why God invented fists
--------------------
|
clock_of_omens
razzle them dazzle them


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 4,097
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: Srirachi]
#22470818 - 11/03/15 12:18 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Srirachi said:What interests me the most is that a great number of people are unable to understand that their unwillingness to abandon the practice of just saying "Your opinion isn't as good as mine" stifles progress more than any belief or religion or anything else.
I know this wasn't a reply to me, but I'm going to reply anyway since you're obviously passively aggressively referring to our arguments. Some opinions are better than others. That is just a fact. Denying it is ridiculous. Also you are aware that that is exactly what religious people do right? They claim their opinions are the best. The problem lies in the fact that opinions are only as good as the reasoning behind them. Religious people base their opinions on what they assume god said based on a book. That is simply not good reasoning.
Quote:
but I do care that people who feel their religious freedom is being taken away from them by the government are branded 'homophobe' as a way to silence them and further abrogate their rights.
I agree with your main point about just labeling people homophobes. Labeling people like that is only an attempt to distract from actual debates. However, religious people who claim their rights are being taken away are just wrong. No rights are being taken away from them.
Quote:
It borders on incomprehensible to me that people don't believe it is a double-standard to say that the definition of the word marriage shouldn't matter to Christians (or whoever) while simultaneously saying that homosexuals are being denied some right by not redefining the word. It's also interesting that people interpret that example as the point of my argument when I've clearly stated that it is the double standard that I'm talking about and not the definition of the word. I suspect that it's just easier to focus on the minutia than the crux.
I'm going to directly address the crux of your argument right now. There is no double standard. No one said the definition of the word shouldn't matter to christians. If they want to care about the definition, no one is stopping them. Both parties can care about the definition of the word. Caring does not matter to what the definition is.
Quote:
I still contend that the GLBT community would make more progress by respecting standing traditions instead of demanding that the other 90% of the population change to accommodate them.
This is obviously not true as marriage has been re-defined. There is no change required from the rest of the population. Gay people being married causes no change for anyone but the gay people.
Quote:
I especially liked how, when I made a clearly hyperbolic example about gay people getting to claim real property in the same way they are claiming intellectual property by redefining marriage to the chagrin of many people, someone fixated on that. It's a typical asshole way of trying to silence someone who has a position you can't actually attack - create an argument you can win by taking a small point out of context and saying it's stupid to say what the person never said in the first place.
I didn't fixate on that. I replied to that part of your post along with every other part of your post. I haven't not replied to anything you have said. You on the other hand have straight up ignored large parts of my arguments.
I actually attacked all of your positions as stated. There was no straw-manning involved.
|
clock_of_omens
razzle them dazzle them


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 4,097
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: eehoo]
#22470824 - 11/03/15 12:19 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
eehoo said: People get a dopamine rush from defending beliefs. Logic is irrelevant in most circumstance. Like I said before, this is why God invented fists
Fighting people over words is for primitive retards.
|
eehoo
Stranger


Registered: 09/26/15
Posts: 711
Last seen: 8 years, 18 days
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: clock_of_omens]
#22470829 - 11/03/15 12:20 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
clock_of_omens said:
Quote:
eehoo said: People get a dopamine rush from defending beliefs. Logic is irrelevant in most circumstance. Like I said before, this is why God invented fists
Fighting people over words is for primitive retards.
Not fighting people over words is for pussies
--------------------
|
clock_of_omens
razzle them dazzle them


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 4,097
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: eehoo]
#22470842 - 11/03/15 12:22 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Ok buddy.
|
Srirachi
Mold Hand



Registered: 10/18/05
Posts: 11,411
Loc: Fare Thee Well.
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: clock_of_omens]
#22470860 - 11/03/15 12:27 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
You've had your say and I've had mine... we're not getting anywhere, so I won't reply to most of that. One thing I will point out and let you decide if it has merit or not:
You state that your opinion that some opinions are better than others is a fact. Can you see how that has a polarizing effect and is counter-productive to the goal of changing people's opinions?
If you approached it from a standpoint that we are both equally valid human beings who have a difference of opinions that should be reasoned through, it would be easier to change my mind. Instead, you say my opinion sucks and I should change it to your opinion. People are seldom receptive to that stuff.
|
clock_of_omens
razzle them dazzle them


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 4,097
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: Srirachi]
#22470910 - 11/03/15 12:37 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Srirachi said: You state that your opinion that some opinions are better than others is a fact. Can you see how that has a polarizing effect and is counter-productive to the goal of changing people's opinions?
It's not an opinion that some opinions are better than others. It is a fact. It is logically impossible for all opinions to be equally valid.
Quote:
If you approached it from a standpoint that we are both equally valid human beings who have a difference of opinions that should be reasoned through, it would be easier to change my mind. Instead, you say my opinion sucks and I should change it to your opinion. People are seldom receptive to that stuff.
I never said we weren't both equally valid human beings whatever that means. Humans are not composed of their opinions. Yes in an argument there are always differing opinions that need to be reasoned through. That is what an argument is. I never said your opinions suck and need to be changed to mine. This would be a case of what you referred to in your previous post about ignoring someone's arguments and attacking an argument they never made. I gave you reasons for my opinions and gave you reasons for why I thought your reasoning was invalid.
|
clock_of_omens
razzle them dazzle them


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 4,097
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: clock_of_omens]
#22470918 - 11/03/15 12:38 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Also, I see you conveniently ignored my direct address to the crux of your argument.
|
eehoo
Stranger


Registered: 09/26/15
Posts: 711
Last seen: 8 years, 18 days
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: clock_of_omens]
#22470949 - 11/03/15 12:45 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Don't tell me you backing that action
--------------------
|
ShiVersblood
VAmPiRES HELLA ❤



Registered: 08/18/07
Posts: 115,620
Loc: United States of America
Last seen: 16 hours, 49 minutes
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: eehoo]
#22471023 - 11/03/15 01:01 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Some people think that the only way to not offend homosexuality is to become homosexual yourself. I disagree with that theory. You can be tolerant of Homosexuality without actually actively going that far. Okay maybe not actually becoming homosexual. But you dont have to actually stand there at a party watching two gay men have sex just to prove your tolerant of homosexuality, ya know.
|
Srirachi
Mold Hand



Registered: 10/18/05
Posts: 11,411
Loc: Fare Thee Well.
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: clock_of_omens]
#22471033 - 11/03/15 01:04 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
It isn't logically impossible for all opinions to be equally valid because an opinion is not reality, it is a perception of reality. Facts can't be in conflict; opinions can. You demean people when you say their truly held beliefs are worthless.
When you state that your opinions are fact, there's little reason to discuss it further, but if there's something concise that you'd like me to respond to I'll gladly do you that courtesy because as much as we disagree, I value what you have to say and your right and need to say it... there's just way too many points to reply to when you dissect each sentence in a paragraph and write a paragraph in response to each . There'd be no end to it. I'd write a paragraph about each sentence in each paragraph you wrote about each sentence I wrote, you'd return in kind...
nobody but you and I would read any of it, and neither of us would change.
|
makaveli8x8
Stranger

Registered: 02/28/06
Posts: 21,636
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: ShiVersblood] 1
#22471073 - 11/03/15 01:15 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
whats happened is there are white knights, when they realized their white knightiness isn't working out, they turn to gay white knightiness. So its not that they are just being tolerant to be PC, its that they really are tolerant because they want buttsecks
--------------------
  We were sent to hell for eternity Ø h® We play on earth to pass the time Over-population the root of all Evil-brings the Elites Closer to the gates.
|
clock_of_omens
razzle them dazzle them


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 4,097
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: Srirachi]
#22471179 - 11/03/15 01:46 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Srirachi said: It isn't logically impossible for all opinions to be equally valid because an opinion is not reality, it is a perception of reality. Facts can't be in conflict; opinions can. You demean people when you say their truly held beliefs are worthless.
Perceptions of reality can be more or less valid. If I am shit faced drunk, my perception of reality is not going to be as valid as someone who is sober. Opinions are based on reasoning. Reasoning can be invalid. Therefore opinions can be invalid.
Quote:
When you state that your opinions are fact, there's little reason to discuss it further, but if there's something concise that you'd like me to respond to I'll gladly do you that courtesy because as much as we disagree, I value what you have to say and your right and need to say it... there's just way too many points to reply to when you dissect each sentence in a paragraph and write a paragraph in response to each . There'd be no end to it. I'd write a paragraph about each sentence in each paragraph you wrote about each sentence I wrote, you'd return in kind...
nobody but you and I would read any of it, and neither of us would change.
The only thing I said is a fact is that not all opinions are equally valid. I didn't say any of my actual opinions were facts. I gave the reasoning behind my opinions and gave the reasoning behind why I thought your opinions were wrong. That is how an argument works. If everyone truly believed that all opinions were equally valid, there would be no such thing as arguing. It's just post-modern nonsense. Some things are right some are wrong.
But that would be awesome. We could compile it into a book, publish it, and get rich. Also note that you are the one who claims neither of us would change. I am not of the delusion that all opinions are equally valid. If someone were to show me through reasoning why any given opinion of mine is wrong, I would be perfectly willing to change it.
But sure here is my direct response to what you said was the crux of your argument:
Quote:
It borders on incomprehensible to me that people don't believe it is a double-standard to say that the definition of the word marriage shouldn't matter to Christians (or whoever) while simultaneously saying that homosexuals are being denied some right by not redefining the word. It's also interesting that people interpret that example as the point of my argument when I've clearly stated that it is the double standard that I'm talking about and not the definition of the word. I suspect that it's just easier to focus on the minutia than the crux.
I'm going to directly address the crux of your argument right now. There is no double standard. No one said the definition of the word shouldn't matter to christians. If they want to care about the definition, no one is stopping them. Both parties can care about the definition of the word. Caring does not matter to what the definition is.
|
Srirachi
Mold Hand



Registered: 10/18/05
Posts: 11,411
Loc: Fare Thee Well.
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: clock_of_omens]
#22471605 - 11/03/15 03:21 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
clock_of_omens said: I'm going to directly address the crux of your argument right now. There is no double standard. No one said the definition of the word shouldn't matter to christians. If they want to care about the definition, no one is stopping them. Both parties can care about the definition of the word. Caring does not matter to what the definition is.
I feel like we're making progress here. Building bridges and whatnot.
If no one has said that Christins shouldn't care about the definition of the word, then what has been said is that Christians have less rights to what is important to them than gay people do.
The basis for my saying this is that the fact that certain factions of the gay rights movement were not content to have a 'domestic partnership' law that conferred all the privileges of marriage under the law. Here's an example: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/17/nyregion/17samesex.html?_r=0
"Many also resent being denied use of the word marriage, which they say carries intangible benefits, prestige and status."
They're seeing something they put value on, and taking it away from the people who originally had it, because they want it.
If Christians see it as an abomination to call a social contract between members of a gay couple the same thing as their traditional ceremony, wouldn't it be the same as if I insisted on calling something I don't like "Gay as fuck?"
|
Cosmic_Flame
THE BREAKFAST EMPRESS



Registered: 11/16/12
Posts: 4,184
Loc: Under The Sea
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: Srirachi] 1
#22472319 - 11/03/15 05:45 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
op is a homophobe confirmed
-------------------- Pull the blinds and change their minds....
|
eehoo
Stranger


Registered: 09/26/15
Posts: 711
Last seen: 8 years, 18 days
|
Re: If you call people 'homophobe' then fuck off. [Re: Srirachi]
#22472706 - 11/03/15 06:58 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Srirachi said: It isn't logically impossible for all opinions to be equally valid because an opinion is not reality, it is a perception of reality. Facts can't be in conflict; opinions can. You demean people when you say their truly held beliefs are worthless.
When you state that your opinions are fact, there's little reason to discuss it further, but if there's something concise that you'd like me to respond to I'll gladly do you that courtesy because as much as we disagree, I value what you have to say and your right and need to say it... there's just way too many points to reply to when you dissect each sentence in a paragraph and write a paragraph in response to each . There'd be no end to it. I'd write a paragraph about each sentence in each paragraph you wrote about each sentence I wrote, you'd return in kind...
nobody but you and I would read any of it, and neither of us would change.
That is the biology of belief. Like I said before, this is why God invented fighting
--------------------
|
|