Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

5 Reasons Liberals Are Such Unpleasant People To Be Around

Page 13 of 21 [ 331 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 21  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

27 Apr 2014, 11:21 pm

Nights_Like_These wrote:
Are you not doing the same thing? Can you read the minds of these people to know that they approach the subject from a place of reason? I know, I get it, they read that they should oppose homosexuality in an ancient book that they read and so they do. If that isn't the height of rationality, then I don't know what is. :D


No, actually, I never made any claims regarding the thoughts of others, I only argued a very discrete point about possible motivations for a given belief. And it appears you still don't quite grasp what 'rational' actually means.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Nights_Like_These
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 722
Location: Ontario, Canada

27 Apr 2014, 11:37 pm

Dox47 wrote:
Nights_Like_These wrote:
Are you not doing the same thing? Can you read the minds of these people to know that they approach the subject from a place of reason? I know, I get it, they read that they should oppose homosexuality in an ancient book that they read and so they do. If that isn't the height of rationality, then I don't know what is. :D


No, actually, I never made any claims regarding the thoughts of others, I only argued a very discrete point about possible motivations for a given belief. And it appears you still don't quite grasp what 'rational' actually means.


I grasp it quite firmly actually. My argument was never over the definition of the word rational, but rather about who we assign the title of "rational" to, which is really a matter of perspective, which I've said several times now.

I'll try harder to view the issue of whether or not it's rational for someone to want to deny me basic rights with a bit more "complete detachment" in the future, 'cause complete detachment is just what the world needs more of after all. :)

Good-day to you!



khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

28 Apr 2014, 12:45 am

GGPViper wrote:
Just to illustrate who Raptor is promoting in this thread:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2AAbF7Dmjs[/youtube]Yup. Same guy as in the link in the OP.


I just checked out this guys YouTube channel. All I have to say about John Hawkins is I seriously hope he takes all of his medications as prescribed, he needs every one of them. I think somewhere in the corner of that room he has an alter with a picture of himself and a little clay John Hawkins figurine. Probably a little prayer rug that he gets down on his knees and bows to himself fifty times in a row while he listens to Rush Limbaugh in one earbud and Mark Levine with another earbud, This dude is seriously out to brunch.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

28 Apr 2014, 2:14 am

Nights_Like_These wrote:
I grasp it quite firmly actually.


I've yet to see any evidence of that, beyond your own assertions of course.

Nights_Like_These wrote:
My argument was never over the definition of the word rational, but rather about who we assign the title of "rational" to, which is really a matter of perspective, which I've said several times now.


Repeating the incorrect doesn't make it any less wrong; you don't want to recognize that 'rational' is an objectively defined standard, not one that you get to arbitrarily pick and choose who it applies to.

Nights_Like_These wrote:
I'll try harder to view the issue of whether or not it's rational for someone to want to deny me basic rights with a bit more "complete detachment" in the future, 'cause complete detachment is just what the world needs more of after all. :)

Good-day to you!


Did I say you should be completely detached? At least a little bit of objectivity would be a plus, certainly, as you seem to be premising your entire "argument" on some variation of personal grievance and emotion rather than facts and logic, but complete detachment probably isn't necessary. If I really felt like prolonging things, I might argue that having a relationship recognized by the state and granted benefits isn't a basic right, but that's pretty off topic.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


TheGoggles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060

28 Apr 2014, 9:16 am

khaoz wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Just to illustrate who Raptor is promoting in this thread:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2AAbF7Dmjs[/youtube]Yup. Same guy as in the link in the OP.


I just checked out this guys YouTube channel. All I have to say about John Hawkins is I seriously hope he takes all of his medications as prescribed, he needs every one of them. I think somewhere in the corner of that room he has an alter with a picture of himself and a little clay John Hawkins figurine. Probably a little prayer rug that he gets down on his knees and bows to himself fifty times in a row while he listens to Rush Limbaugh in one earbud and Mark Levine with another earbud, This dude is seriously out to brunch.


To be fair, his private life is probably completely joyless and miserable. I mean, look at the guy. He looks like Friar Tuck during a bad hair day. His greatest achievement is owning a blog and interviewing Anne Coulter, a woman whose entire career is based around appearing in as many places as she possibly can. If I stewed in self-loathing for as long as he has, I'd probably join the Rick Santorum deathcult too.



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,558
Location: Aux Arcs

28 Apr 2014, 9:22 am

You could easily fit two nickels in the gap in that old boys front teeth.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


Nights_Like_These
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 722
Location: Ontario, Canada

28 Apr 2014, 9:35 am

Dox47 wrote:
Nights_Like_These wrote:
I grasp it quite firmly actually.


I've yet to see any evidence of that, beyond your own assertions of course.


Nights_Like_These wrote:
My argument was never over the definition of the word rational, but rather about who we assign the title of "rational" to, which is really a matter of perspective, which I've said several times now.


Dox47 wrote:
Repeating the incorrect doesn't make it any less wrong; you don't want to recognize that 'rational' is an objectively defined standard, not one that you get to arbitrarily pick and choose who it applies to.


Nights_Like_These wrote:
I'll try harder to view the issue of whether or not it's rational for someone to want to deny me basic rights with a bit more "complete detachment" in the future, 'cause complete detachment is just what the world needs more of after all. :)

Good-day to you!


Dox47 wrote:
Did I say you should be completely detached? At least a little bit of objectivity would be a plus, certainly, as you seem to be premising your entire "argument" on some variation of personal grievance and emotion rather than facts and logic, but complete detachment probably isn't necessary. If I really felt like prolonging things, I might argue that having a relationship recognized by the state and granted benefits isn't a basic right, but that's pretty off topic.


Luckily I live in a country where it WAS determined to be my right, 10 years ago (not that I plan on getting married anytime soon).

I recognise that there is an "objectively standard" definition of the word rational in the dictionary, but there is also an objectively standard definition of the world "normal" in the dictionary, and yet everyone has a different idea about what normal is, again NOT a different idea about what the actual textbook definition of the word is, but about how it is applied, the same could be said of the word "logical". There's no emotion or personal grievance behind that assertion.

Dox47 wrote:
Nights_Like_These wrote:
I grasp it quite firmly actually.


I've yet to see any evidence of that, beyond your own assertions of course.


I could say the same of you, there's that difference in perspective again.

I'm going out of town now for several days and so I'm probably not going to respond to any more posts on this thread, even though I'm sure you'll post another response anyway (something tells me you like having the last word), just to tell me how wrong I am and how I don't understand the definition of the word rational, oh, and how emotional I am about it all (hopefully I just saved you the trouble), but I think I may have actually stopped caring several posts ago, it only took this long for my fingers to catch up with my brain. :D



Don_Pedro_Zamacona
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2014
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 78

28 Apr 2014, 11:04 am

Dox47 wrote:
That's your opinion and you're welcome to it, but it does not change the facts on the ground, that there is such a thing as rational opposition to gay marriage; how you feel about it is completely beside the point.



The only "rational" argument against gay marriage is that religious scriptures state that homosexuality is sinful and define marriage as a monogmous heterosexual relationship. It hinges entirely on the pressuppositions that 1) religion is actually true(which has yet to be proven or disproven) and 2) that marriage is a religious institution. Presupposition #2 is false in the US.

As I have stated before, separation of church and state is embedded in the US constitution which is the kernel of civil, criminal, and family law in America! Religious people see gay marriage as defiling what they view as a sacred rite. And now, the defeat of the DOMA confirms that the law does not recognize their authority on the legal contract of marriage.

So what exactly IS the "rational" secular argument against gay marriage? Enough with the finger pointing at others. Just present your case. And no, I'm not going to dig through this entire thread to find it. If you posted it before, you can post it again.



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 43
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

28 Apr 2014, 12:21 pm

Okay, I've gotta ask.......

Why does it matter if an argument against gay marriage is "rational" or not? It seems some folks view "rationality" as a flaming sword of justice that can only be wielded by the "good" guys.

I believe it's possible for someone to make a "rational" argument, completely free of logical errors, for exterminating the Jews, but it doesn't make the aforesaid sentiment "right" in any other sense. Additional, just because an argument may involve some level of emotion it doesn't mean said argument is automatically "wrong."

"Rational" =/= "right"

People can present me with perfectly objective, rational arguments against gay marriage, and I'm more than happy to kick holes in them.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

28 Apr 2014, 12:31 pm

Its funny though how people who want to use the bible as an excuse to disagree with homosexuality (even though there is nothing in the bible about homosexuality to begin with) want to overlook everything else in the bible about adultery, incest, rape.., you know, all those things that would target almost every human being in existence with stoning or worse. Its only homosexuality they want to condemn.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

28 Apr 2014, 1:29 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
Okay, I've gotta ask.......

Why does it matter if an argument against gay marriage is "rational" or not? It seems some folks view "rationality" as a flaming sword of justice that can only be wielded by the "good" guys.

I believe it's possible for someone to make a "rational" argument, completely free of logical errors, for exterminating the Jews, but it doesn't make the aforesaid sentiment "right" in any other sense. Additional, just because an argument may involve some level of emotion it doesn't mean said argument is automatically "wrong."

"Rational" =/= "right"

People can present me with perfectly objective, rational arguments against gay marriage, and I'm more than happy to kick holes in them.


At this point the whole gay thing is well on it's way to becoming, for all practical purposes, an irrelevant issue in this country. To quote a local bar owner who two years ago intentionally turned his straight bar into a gay bar to increase business; "Gay is in". After thinking about it I came to the conclusion that he was right and his bar business did for a fact pick up when it had been slow before. You could say this was more about a shrewd business decision but that decision was a refection of the reality we now live in. No one has to approve or disapprove of how things are because they just are and will continue to be. Period!

I don't even remember how this thread got derailed into what it has become and I don't care because I'm enjoying the drama that has unfolded.
Image


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Last edited by Raptor on 28 Apr 2014, 5:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Stannis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,631

28 Apr 2014, 2:17 pm

Was his name Moe?



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

28 Apr 2014, 2:32 pm

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Tu0qFXxYro[/youtube]


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

28 Apr 2014, 2:55 pm

Who's Moe?


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,558
Location: Aux Arcs

28 Apr 2014, 2:57 pm

It's from the Simpsons.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

28 Apr 2014, 3:03 pm

I've rarely watched the Simpsons....


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson