forum Debate. Debate. Debate.

Started March 14, 2019 by Deleted user

tune

Edit topic

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."

1. 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.

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."

1. 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 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.

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

I'm going to give a brief example from my own, Christian, non LGBT supporting life.
We used to go to a church from a denomination. I'd spent the first 13 years of my life there, and we left because the denomination made some choices about how they were going to interpret the bible, and those choices weren't accepted by my parents, or by myself. Thus, we switched churches and I went through the worst twelve months of my life. I still don't really like my new church, and I've been going for almost a year.
I was very much affected by it, and if you're telling me that my emotions are invalid here because I'm a straight Christian and therefore unaffected by anything LGBT people do, you're wrong. The same goes for my brothers, who, gasp are straight white Christian men.

^

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.

First off, I am Christian, so don't talk down to me.
Second, countries have literally banned being gay and have it be punishable by death, so yeah the stakes are pretty damn high.
Thirdly, I am not obligated to entertain and listen to the opinions of a 12 year old who's trying to tell me how to debate. I can choose to listen to or ignore anyone I feel like listening to or ignoring.
Write up a decent argument without regurgitating the same points before calling my reaction unreasonable.

I'm going to give a brief example from my own, Christian, non LGBT supporting life.
We used to go to a church from a denomination. I'd spent the first 13 years of my life there, and we left because the denomination made some choices about how they were going to interpret the bible, and those choices weren't accepted by my parents, or by myself. Thus, we switched churches and I went through the worst twelve months of my life. I still don't really like my new church, and I've been going for almost a year.
I was very much affected by it, and if you're telling me that my emotions are invalid here because I'm a straight Christian and therefore unaffected by anything LGBT people do, you're wrong. The same goes for my brothers, who, gasp are straight white Christian men.

People have literally been killed over people misunderstanding the Bible and saying it's anti-gay, but tell me again how much it sucks for you to go to a new church. How horrible.
Your emotions aren't invalid, but they certainly aren't nearly as important as the LGBTQA+ people who have been killed, beaten, or disowned over religion and sexuality and/or gender combining.

I have an idea for a new subject because book reports:

Should required reading be demanded from schools, and if so, what books should be taught? And should graphic novels count?

People have literally been killed over people misunderstanding the Bible and saying it's anti-gay, but tell me again how much it sucks for you to go to a new church. How horrible.
Your emotions aren't invalid, but they certainly aren't nearly as important as the LGBTQA+ people who have been killed, beaten, or disowned over religion and sexuality and/or gender combining.

Yeah. Most people who kill the gays are not acting in a Christian manner. If they are not acting Christian, don't blame the Christians.

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.

First off, I am Christian, so don't talk down to me.
Second, countries have literally banned being gay and have it be punishable by death, so yeah the stakes are pretty damn high.
Thirdly, I am not obligated to entertain and listen to the opinions of a 12 year old who's trying to tell me how to debate. I can choose to listen to or ignore anyone I feel like listening to or ignoring.
Write up a decent argument without regurgitating the same points before calling my reaction unreasonable.

1. If you are a Christian why can't you understand the importance of following what you believe to be Christian morals?
2. How many times do we have to say that we know for you to understand that we know?

3. Pot calling the kettle black. Plus she's doing a better job then you.

4. Serious talk here.
   I don't know, but I am afraid that you are getting emotional. That's not good for you. If you are getting seriously affected you should stop. Trust me. It could poison the already dubious relationships you have with me and Nutella. Debating is all about learning to see things from the other persons point of view so as to grow in mental strength as well as widen your mind and be more tolerant. If this is damaging to you, it's not worth it.
   Simply put, you have to remain emotionally distant during these or it can have negative effects on you. No one wants that.

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.

First off, I am Christian, so don't talk down to me.

Okay. So?

Second, countries have literally banned being gay and have it be punishable by death, so yeah the stakes are pretty damn high.

That’s not what we were arguing, both Dom and I have clearly stated that you guys deserve equality whether the Bible says it’s sinful or not, and If you’d just freaking listen to me then maybe you would’ve gotten that by now.

If I’m educated properly, the stakes of an argument are what problems/sacrifices people would have to put up with if that argument was put into place.
In this case, If the law was changed to line up with the opposing arguments (mine and Dom’s), then gay marriage would be fully legal and you’d be free to do whatever you want as long as you don’t hurt or effect anyone else. The only stakes would be that most denominations of Christians would have officially recognized homosexuality as a sin, which as long as you aren’t running around church halls screaming “HEY LOOK AT ME, IM GAYYYYYY!”, shouldn’t effect you much other than occasionally having to hear people mention it as sinful.

Thirdly, I am not obligated to entertain and listen to the opinions of a 12 year old who's trying to tell me how to debate. I can choose to listen to or ignore anyone I feel like listening to or ignoring.

I’m 13, and yet I actually try to pay attention to other people’s arguments instead of just saying “Nope, this person disagrees with me, guess I don’t have to listen!”

You are not obligated to listen to me by any means, however, you probably should, or else you’re just going to end up arguing with yourself for entire debates.

Okay but seriously, you sound exactly like my 9-year-old brother. You plug your ears when people present a counter-argument, repeat the same things over and over again, and if you can’t debunk a point, you just shout something along the lines of “Uh huh, and I don’t care, so shut up!”.

Write up a decent argument without regurgitating the same points before calling my reaction unreasonable.

I wouldn’t have to regurgitate everything if you wouldn’t brush off arguments by saying “You’re not gay so therefore your opinion doesn’t matter” or “but other people have it worse so therefore none of your problems exist and you’re pathetic for complaining about them”. If you can write up a decent reason why Dom and I aren’t allowed to get involved in debates that technically involve us unless we agree on everything you say, then maybe I’d stop considering this reaction unreasonable.

(Sorry if I’m getting a little bit bitter here, I don’t know if you can tell but I don’t necessarily like it when people try and silence me for things I can’t change about myself.)

(Also, it’s far past my bedtime so… Goodnight fellow sentient beings made up of cells)

1. I understand the importance, and I am. And it's not any of your business how I follow my religion.
2. When you all acknowledge it.
3. Bullshit, but whatever. My arguments aren't the same poorly worded hunk of text that barfs up the same 3 points again and again, but go off I guess.
4. Emotions are good. If my arguing helps you see the perspective of a community I am a part of, I have every right to argue for it. If you and Nutella can't handle me debating, that seems like a you issue. I don't hold debates against people, it's not my issue if you do. And I'm already an emotional wreck so it doesn't matter.

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.

First off, I am Christian, so don't talk down to me.

Okay. So?

Second, countries have literally banned being gay and have it be punishable by death, so yeah the stakes are pretty damn high.

That’s not what we were arguing, both Dom and I have clearly stated that you guys deserve equality whether the Bible says it’s sinful or not, and If you’d just freaking listen to me then maybe you would’ve gotten that by now.

If I’m educated properly, the stakes of an argument are what problems/sacrifices people would have to put up with if that argument was put into place.
In this case, If the law was changed to line up with the opposing arguments (mine and Dom’s), then gay marriage would be fully legal and you’d be free to do whatever you want as long as you don’t hurt or effect anyone else. The only stakes would be that most denominations of Christians would have officially recognized homosexuality as a sin, which as long as you aren’t running around church halls screaming “HEY LOOK AT ME, IM GAYYYYYY!”, shouldn’t effect you much other than occasionally having to hear people mention it as sinful.

Thirdly, I am not obligated to entertain and listen to the opinions of a 12 year old who's trying to tell me how to debate. I can choose to listen to or ignore anyone I feel like listening to or ignoring.

I’m 13, and yet I actually try to pay attention to other people’s arguments instead of just saying “Nope, this person disagrees with me, guess I don’t have to listen!”

You are not obligated to listen to me by any means, however, you probably should, or else you’re just going to end up arguing with yourself for entire debates.

Okay but seriously, you sound exactly like my 9-year-old brother. You plug your ears when people present a counter-argument, repeat the same things over and over again, and if you can’t debunk a point, you just shout something along the lines of “Uh huh, and I don’t care, so shut up!”.

Write up a decent argument without regurgitating the same points before calling my reaction unreasonable.

I wouldn’t have to regurgitate everything if you wouldn’t brush off arguments by saying “You’re not gay so therefore your opinion doesn’t matter” or “but other people have it worse so therefore none of your problems exist and you’re pathetic for complaining about them”. If you can write up a decent reason why Dom and I aren’t allowed to get involved in debates that technically involve us unless we agree on everything you say, then maybe I’d stop considering this reaction unreasonable.

(Sorry if I’m getting a little bit bitter here, I don’t know if you can tell but I don’t necessarily like it when people try and silence me for things I can’t change about myself.)

(Also, it’s far past my bedtime so… Goodnight fellow sentient beings made up of cells)

What I said was that for my mental health, I don't have to value a person's opinion. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black, look at your Pro-Life arguments from earlier to see an example of plugging your ears and not caring. And yes, in an argument involving gay rights, straight people's opinions don't matter because they don't experience what gay people do. They can have input, but at the end of the day, it's not nearly as important as the gay people's opinions on the subject. And I didn't say that your problems are invalid, everyone's issues are valid, but making it into 'SWM have it bad' is a dick move when we should be focusing on others who have it worse first.
Maybe you should let me have a philosophy without bitching about it.