I know this isn't the Rudeness chat so saying this probably makes me an awful human being, but am I the only one who finds it funny that the same people saying "SWMs are never judged for who they are" tried to silence Dom's opinions in a past debate simply because he's straight, even though due to his religion that debate effects him as well?
Then why, exactly, should we focus on fixing the egos fixing the minor issues that SWM have when others are literally dying? It seems like since, as you said, they're at the bottom of the pole, we should fix issues that, y'know, matter.
I know this isn't the Rudeness chat so saying this probably makes me an awful human being, but am I the only one who finds it funny that the same people saying "SWMs are never judged for who they are" tried to silence Dom's opinions in a past debate simply because he's straight, even though due to his religion that debate effects him as well?
They're not 'judged for who they are', they're judged for butting in on things that don't concern them. Like LGBTQA+ rights, for example.
I know this isn't the Rudeness chat so saying this probably makes me an awful human being, but am I the only one who finds it funny that the same people saying "SWMs are never judged for who they are" tried to silence Dom's opinions in a past debate simply because he's straight, even though due to his religion that debate effects him as well?They're not 'judged for who they are', they're judged for butting in on things that don't concern them. Like LGBTQA+ rights, for example.
The debate was whether or not homosexuality would be considered sinful in the Bible. He's Christian, the debate does concern him.
Then why, exactly, should we focus on
fixing the egosfixing the minor issues that SWM have when others are literally dying? It seems like since, as you said, they're at the bottom of the pole, we should fix issues that, y'know, matter.
"Because others have it worse the problem should not be addressed? Are you sure you want to argue that?
No, when you show me an actual issue that SWMs have that isn't 'we get made fun of sometimes :(', we can argue that."
It would suck, but that doesn't mean I could just kill the person, that's cruel and messed up…
As I also explained before, it's a humane process that I have witnessed myself. It's not cruel. If you did not have the right to control your body you wouldn't be so happy sunshine about the reason for that. Read the damn argument. I'm over this. When you have a proper argument other than 'It hurts my feelings', then we'll talk.
How bout: birthing is a completely natural process that allows humans to exist. Also, there are truely detrimental things that happen in our bodies that we do not control simply because we can, due to the fact it is nature.
Yea no. Firstly, not talking about birth, talking about pregnancy, which is a natural process, that I will agree on. But you know what else is? Abortion. The body can and will naturally abort a fertilized egg. This actually happens so commonly that most women think that it is a natural period. Miscarriages are also natural. Lastly, we can control anything and everything in our bodies, we remove sickness with antibiotics, we go through immense therapy to get rid of cancer. Sickness and Tumors are 'natural' and we get rid of them. Next time actually READ what I wrote in the argument before. We've talked about all of this already.
I know this isn't the Rudeness chat so saying this probably makes me an awful human being, but am I the only one who finds it funny that the same people saying "SWMs are never judged for who they are" tried to silence Dom's opinions in a past debate simply because he's straight, even though due to his religion that debate effects him as well?They're not 'judged for who they are', they're judged for butting in on things that don't concern them. Like LGBTQA+ rights, for example.
The debate was whether or not homosexuality would be considered sinful in the Bible. He's Christian, the debate does concern him.
Applause
It would suck, but that doesn't mean I could just kill the person, that's cruel and messed up…
As I also explained before, it's a humane process that I have witnessed myself. It's not cruel. If you did not have the right to control your body you wouldn't be so happy sunshine about the reason for that. Read the damn argument. I'm over this. When you have a proper argument other than 'It hurts my feelings', then we'll talk.
How bout: birthing is a completely natural process that allows humans to exist. Also, there are truely detrimental things that happen in our bodies that we do not control simply because we can, due to the fact it is nature.
Yea no. Firstly, not talking about birth, talking about pregnancy, which is a natural process, that I will agree on. But you know what else is? Abortion. The body can and will naturally abort a fertilized egg. This actually happens so commonly that most women think that it is a natural period. Miscarriages are also natural. Lastly, we can control anything and everything in our bodies, we remove sickness with antibiotics, we go through immense therapy to get rid of cancer. Sickness and Tumors are 'natural' and we get rid of them. Next time actually READ what I wrote in the argument before. We've talked about all of this already.
So are you of the sect that thinks if a fetus is lost in a miscarriage the mother shouldn't grieve?
I know this isn't the Rudeness chat so saying this probably makes me an awful human being, but am I the only one who finds it funny that the same people saying "SWMs are never judged for who they are" tried to silence Dom's opinions in a past debate simply because he's straight, even though due to his religion that debate effects him as well?They're not 'judged for who they are', they're judged for butting in on things that don't concern them. Like LGBTQA+ rights, for example.
The debate was whether or not homosexuality would be considered sinful in the Bible. He's Christian, the debate does concern him.
Applause
It's honestly none of his damn business who people love, and if all he's going to do is scream "IT'S SINFUL!" at us, then no, it doesn't concern him at all.
Not really. But it is my business as a Christian to know what is moral and immoral as defined by my faith.
Also I actually don't do that, making that a Straw Man Argument.
I know this isn't the Rudeness chat so saying this probably makes me an awful human being, but am I the only one who finds it funny that the same people saying "SWMs are never judged for who they are" tried to silence Dom's opinions in a past debate simply because he's straight, even though due to his religion that debate effects him as well?They're not 'judged for who they are', they're judged for butting in on things that don't concern them. Like LGBTQA+ rights, for example.
The debate was whether or not homosexuality would be considered sinful in the Bible. He's Christian, the debate does concern him.
Applause
It's honestly none of his damn business who people love, and if all he's going to do is scream "IT'S SINFUL!" at us, then no, it doesn't concern him at all.
Except he isn't, he specifically stated multiple times that people should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else, regardless of whether his specific viewpoint sees it as wrong or not. That includes liking someone of your own gender.
However, since that was a debate that involved his religion, he voiced his own opinions. He believes it's sinful, although he wouldn't shove that down people's throats.
You can't just tell everyone you disagree with that their opinions don't matter.
But obviously you see that blaming the Jews is both wrong and illogical. I say the same with those who blame the SWMs for oppression against (insert here).
But why?? SWMs are to blame for the oppression they cause over others. It's not illogical to place blame where blame is due.
Africans were not richer, did not have better lives than the SWMs of the United States during slavery, and yet they were put down and considered wrong simply because of the color of their skin. So how was it the African's fault that they were oppressed?Never said it was.
"SWMs are to blame for the oppression they cause over others." Well yes, but you can't use that as a definite argument if that is the thing we are arguing about.
Now about the slavery. There were black slave owners. Also many of the abolitionists were SWMs. If there are exceptions then it is a Generalization not a true statement.
Let's get a little personal here. I would be counted among the SWMs. I disagree but others wouldn't care about that. How is oppression my fault?
But that is the argument we are having? That SWMs are to blame for their own actions in oppressing others.
A generalization is still true and you did not answer my question. You are trying to shift the blame of the actions of SWM by saying 'Oh everyone else did it too so it is okay." when we all know that it is not. Let's not forget that the ratio of white to black slave owners is ridiculously out of proportion. That most black slave owners in Africa only participated to save their own people from the Whites. You tried to explain away the German reason for the murder of Jewish innocents because they 'were richer'. Acknowledge that SWMs are to blame for their actions and should be accountable just like every other race. They are not better and should not be treated as such. Most atrocities that have happened in modern history are because the SWM thought he was better than everyone else, when in fact his ego and volatile nature are to blame.
Oppression is your fault because you would stand back and let it happen. You would vote against Gay marriage. You would vote against women's rights to healthcare. Or you would not vote at all and let the other White Males speak for you.
It would suck, but that doesn't mean I could just kill the person, that's cruel and messed up…
As I also explained before, it's a humane process that I have witnessed myself. It's not cruel. If you did not have the right to control your body you wouldn't be so happy sunshine about the reason for that. Read the damn argument. I'm over this. When you have a proper argument other than 'It hurts my feelings', then we'll talk.
How bout: birthing is a completely natural process that allows humans to exist. Also, there are truely detrimental things that happen in our bodies that we do not control simply because we can, due to the fact it is nature.
Yea no. Firstly, not talking about birth, talking about pregnancy, which is a natural process, that I will agree on. But you know what else is? Abortion. The body can and will naturally abort a fertilized egg. This actually happens so commonly that most women think that it is a natural period. Miscarriages are also natural. Lastly, we can control anything and everything in our bodies, we remove sickness with antibiotics, we go through immense therapy to get rid of cancer. Sickness and Tumors are 'natural' and we get rid of them. Next time actually READ what I wrote in the argument before. We've talked about all of this already.
So are you of the sect that thinks if a fetus is lost in a miscarriage the mother shouldn't grieve?
I never said that at all????????????????????????????
Your pardon for implying such. It was a question, nothing more.
But if a fetus is't a human and abortion is completely fine, why should we grieve over a deceased fetus?
You can't just tell everyone you disagree with that their opinions don't matter.
I can, I have, and I will again.
Especially if their argument concerns me, and is also inaccurate.
But obviously you see that blaming the Jews is both wrong and illogical. I say the same with those who blame the SWMs for oppression against (insert here).
But why?? SWMs are to blame for the oppression they cause over others. It's not illogical to place blame where blame is due.
Africans were not richer, did not have better lives than the SWMs of the United States during slavery, and yet they were put down and considered wrong simply because of the color of their skin. So how was it the African's fault that they were oppressed?Never said it was.
"SWMs are to blame for the oppression they cause over others." Well yes, but you can't use that as a definite argument if that is the thing we are arguing about.
Now about the slavery. There were black slave owners. Also many of the abolitionists were SWMs. If there are exceptions then it is a Generalization not a true statement.
Let's get a little personal here. I would be counted among the SWMs. I disagree but others wouldn't care about that. How is oppression my fault?
But that is the argument we are having? That SWMs are to blame for their own actions in oppressing others.
A generalization is still true and you did not answer my question. You are trying to shift the blame of the actions of SWM by saying 'Oh everyone else did it too so it is okay." when we all know that it is not. Let's not forget that the ratio of white to black slave owners is ridiculously out of proportion. That most black slave owners in Africa only participated to save their own people from the Whites. You tried to explain away the German reason for the murder of Jewish innocents because they 'were richer'. Acknowledge that SWMs are to blame for their actions and should be accountable just like every other race. They are not better and should not be treated as such. Most atrocities that have happened in modern history are because the SWM thought he was better than everyone else, when in fact his ego and volatile nature are to blame.
Oppression is your fault because you would stand back and let it happen. You would vote against Gay marriage. You would vote against women's rights to healthcare. Or you would not vote at all and let the other White Males speak for you.
"But that is the argument we are having? That SWMs are to blame for their own actions in oppressing others."
If it was it would be an open and shut case. But I do not agree that SWMs are an inherently oppressive group, or even that that group can be made.
"You are trying to shift the blame of the actions of SWM by saying 'Oh everyone else did it too so it is okay." when we all know that it is not." No I didn't/am not.
"Let's not forget that the ratio of white to black slave owners is ridiculously out of proportion. That most black slave owners in Africa only participated to save their own people from the Whites."
"They are not better and should not be treated as such."
Yes. Ad you know I think that.
"Most atrocities that have happened in modern history are because the SWM thought he was better than everyone else, when in fact his ego and volatile nature are to blame."
Even if that is true it shouldn't screw up the whole thing for all SWMs. That would be like agreeing with Agamemnon that because of Clytemnestra all women could not be trusted.
You can't just tell everyone you disagree with that their opinions don't matter.
I can, I have, and I will again.
Well I am afraid that goes against all rules and etiquette of proper arguing.
You can't just tell everyone you disagree with that their opinions don't matter.
I can, I have, and I will again.
Well I am afraid that goes against all rules and etiquette of proper arguing.
And I'm afraid that I don't give two fucks. Sorry :/
But obviously you see that blaming the Jews is both wrong and illogical. I say the same with those who blame the SWMs for oppression against (insert here).
But why?? SWMs are to blame for the oppression they cause over others. It's not illogical to place blame where blame is due.
Africans were not richer, did not have better lives than the SWMs of the United States during slavery, and yet they were put down and considered wrong simply because of the color of their skin. So how was it the African's fault that they were oppressed?Never said it was.
"SWMs are to blame for the oppression they cause over others." Well yes, but you can't use that as a definite argument if that is the thing we are arguing about.
Now about the slavery. There were black slave owners. Also many of the abolitionists were SWMs. If there are exceptions then it is a Generalization not a true statement.
Let's get a little personal here. I would be counted among the SWMs. I disagree but others wouldn't care about that. How is oppression my fault?
But that is the argument we are having? That SWMs are to blame for their own actions in oppressing others.
A generalization is still true and you did not answer my question. You are trying to shift the blame of the actions of SWM by saying 'Oh everyone else did it too so it is okay." when we all know that it is not. Let's not forget that the ratio of white to black slave owners is ridiculously out of proportion. That most black slave owners in Africa only participated to save their own people from the Whites. You tried to explain away the German reason for the murder of Jewish innocents because they 'were richer'. Acknowledge that SWMs are to blame for their actions and should be accountable just like every other race. They are not better and should not be treated as such. Most atrocities that have happened in modern history are because the SWM thought he was better than everyone else, when in fact his ego and volatile nature are to blame.
Oppression is your fault because you would stand back and let it happen. You would vote against Gay marriage. You would vote against women's rights to healthcare. Or you would not vote at all and let the other White Males speak for you.
"But that is the argument we are having? That SWMs are to blame for their own actions in oppressing others."
If it was it would be an open and shut case. But I do not agree that SWMs are an inherently oppressive group, or even that that group can be made."You are trying to shift the blame of the actions of SWM by saying 'Oh everyone else did it too so it is okay." when we all know that it is not." No I didn't/am not.
"Let's not forget that the ratio of white to black slave owners is ridiculously out of proportion. That most black slave owners in Africa only participated to save their own people from the Whites."
- Well of course. 2. And you think this why?
"They are not better and should not be treated as such."
Yes. Ad you know I think that."Most atrocities that have happened in modern history are because the SWM thought he was better than everyone else, when in fact his ego and volatile nature are to blame."
Even if that is true it shouldn't screw up the whole thing for all SWMs. That would be like agreeing with Agamemnon that because of Clytemnestra all women could not be trusted.
It wasn't just one SWM like your example, it's a lot. SWMs are the reason that black people were enslaved, women couldn't vote, and gay marriage was illegal.
You can't just tell everyone you disagree with that their opinions don't matter.
I can, I have, and I will again.
Well I am afraid that goes against all rules and etiquette of proper arguing.
And I'm afraid that I don't give two fucks. Sorry :/
Well then you should probably leave if you are not going to care about the rules of the game.
You can't just tell everyone you disagree with that their opinions don't matter.
I can, I have, and I will again.
Well I am afraid that goes against all rules and etiquette of proper arguing.
And I'm afraid that I don't give two fucks. Sorry :/
Well then you should probably leave if you are not going to care about the rules of the game.
I'll stay if I fucking want to stay.
You can't just tell everyone you disagree with that their opinions don't matter.
I can, I have, and I will again.
Especially if their argument concerns me, and is also inaccurate.
But what if your argument concerns them?
Usually, when people commit terrible sin, they often try to convince themselves that it wasn't that bad, and it often takes someone from an outside perspective to explain to them "No, it was that bad, you need to get to confession immediately" (speaking from experience there). So, if loving your own gender is, indeed, a sin, then maybe you're just trying to reason with yourself and therefore your opinions don't matter. Right?
Oh gosh, just typing that example ticked me off and I'm not even gay No, your opinions matter just as much as anyone else's. The topic does concern you, so, therefore, your voice should be heard even if there's a chance it might be incorrect.
So if people can just silence anyone they disagree with, then you, Jynnie, have been silenced. You aren't Dom and can't have an opinion on his opinion because that would be an opinion and I disagree with it so therefore the opinion on an opinion isn't a valid opinion, in my opinion.
…Do you see how ridiculous and offensive that is? Probably not because I'm terrible at explaining stuff
That debate involved Christians, gays, and gay Christians. We weren't getting angry when non-Christian gays got involved, you shouldn't be angry that non-gay Christians got involved as well.
"They are not better and should not be treated as such."
Yes. Ad you know I think that.
"Most atrocities that have happened in modern history are because the SWM thought he was better than everyone else, when in fact his ego and volatile nature are to blame."
Even if that is true it shouldn't screw up the whole thing for all SWMs. That would be like agreeing with Agamemnon that because of Clytemnestra all women could not be trusted.
It wasn't just one SWM like your example, it's a lot. SWMs are the reason that black people were enslaved, women couldn't vote, and gay marriage was illegal.
Yeah, and only SWMs did that stuff? No. There are terrible gay people and black people too.
Well yes. Because whites were the majority. You think a black country would never enslave whites if they were the minority?
Also women didn't want the vote. (Or so it was said.)
"IN 1895 the women of Massachusetts were asked by the state whether they wished the suffrage. Of the 575,000 voting women in the state, only 22,204 cared for it enough to deposit in a ballot box an affirmative answer to this question. That is, in round numbers, less than four per cent wished to vote; about ninety-six per cent were opposed to woman suffrage or indifferent to it. That this expresses fairly well the average sentiment throughout the country can hardly be questioned."
That was based off religion, nothing else.
You can't just tell everyone you disagree with that their opinions don't matter.
I can, I have, and I will again.
Well I am afraid that goes against all rules and etiquette of proper arguing.
And I'm afraid that I don't give two fucks. Sorry :/
Well then you should probably leave if you are not going to care about the rules of the game.
I'll stay if I fucking want to stay.
I said you should, not that I would try to make you. And that is a window into how I view things I don't agree with.
You can't just tell everyone you disagree with that their opinions don't matter.
I can, I have, and I will again.
Especially if their argument concerns me, and is also inaccurate.But what if your argument concerns them?
Usually, when people commit terrible sin, they often try to convince themselves that it wasn't that bad, and it often takes someone from an outside perspective to explain to them "No, it was that bad, you need to get to confession immediately" (speaking from experience there). So, if loving your own gender is, indeed, a sin, then maybe you're just trying to reason with yourself and therefore your opinions don't matter. Right?
Oh gosh, just typing that example ticked me off and I'm not even gayNo, your opinions matter just as much as anyone else's. The topic does concern you, so, therefore, your voice should be heard even if there's a chance it might be incorrect.So if people can just silence anyone they disagree with, then you, Jynnie, have been silenced. You aren't Dom and can't have an opinion on his opinion because that would be an opinion and I disagree with it so therefore the opinion on an opinion isn't a valid opinion, in my opinion.
…Do you see how ridiculous and offensive that is?
Probably not because I'm terrible at explaining stuffThat debate involved Christians, gays, and gay Christians. We weren't getting angry when non-Christian gays got involved, you shouldn't be angry that non-gay Christians got involved as well.
That literally made no sense. I just said that I don't care about the opinions of people I disagree with, no need to flip your shit.
Also, since it involves, as you said, 'Christians, gays, and gay Christians', maybe in that case, the opinions of the gay people and gay Christians should be the most important? Just a thought, since they're the ones who actually have a stake in that argument.
Christians that do not support lgtb have an equally important stake.
Not really.
Also, since it involves, as you said, 'Christians, gays, and gay Christians', maybe, in that case, the opinions of the gay people and gay Christians should be the most important? Just a thought, since they're the ones who actually have a stake in that argument.
…
Are you trying to tell me that Christians aren't affected by a debate on how to interpret the Bible? You might not know this, but the Bible is kind of considered an important thing for many Christians due to the fact that it's one of the main foundations of our beliefs
Also, even if the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, that doesn't mean gays should be completely forbidden from living their own lives as equals. The only "stakes" for them in that argument were that every once in a while, someone might say "Uhhh, isn't that considered sinful?". I know, there are such high risks there.
You cannot silence someone you disagree with just because you disagree with them. That's practically the debate equivalent of my little brother plugging his ears and singing "I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALALA" whenever I try to have a reasonable conversation with him.
Applause