Jump to content
Fat Ass Kelly Price

Carson: No 'extra rights' for gay Americans

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Earth Ripper said:

I'm not saying their freedoms are being taken away, I'm saying that your entire line of argumentation can be copied (with some words replaced) and used by someone who opposes gay marriage 

But that's really just a logical fallacy and doesn't apply to reality so why even bring it up?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Infrared said:

Do you even live in the U.S sis oprah8 They've had about 50 to 60 years to change their opinions, and nothing has changed. 

That's because they believe they have a two thousand year old tradition that is morally superior to those 50/60 years of what we call progress eve1 

13 minutes ago, Infrared said:

The constitution itself is problematic because people want to use rules dated in 1700's when it's the 21st century oprah8

100% agreed. Imo the Constitution should be abolished, but that requires a separate discussion and I don't think it's relevant for this issue. The Constitution is still in place and people who oppose gay marriage make lots of use of it, so that's just a problem we have to face, and I like to believe that that problem can be faced by doing something different than simply mocking and insulting people who don't support our cause julia1 That's literally how simple my pov is, I don't know why it's spun into something different.

15 minutes ago, Infrared said:

We can't wait around for millions of years - The U.S is in deep trouble and it's only going to get worse.

I already said I support the idea of the necessity of force for change, but I don't believe that the "enlightened rationalists" vs. "uneducated idiots" tension is a wise foundation to build that force onto lj1 I explicitly said that I'd like to see a combination of activism and a simultaneous taking seriously of the opposition, so all of that "you just want to wait until people wise up" reasoning is a complete misrepresentation of what I'm saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Earth Ripper said:

That is not what I said. I'm talking about the logic to justify forcing unwanted cultural values and ideas on people who aren't willing/ready to accept them brit12 Don't do this, man. I'm bringing up good arguments whether you agree with them or not, don't treat me like I'm some idiot. 

Legalising gay marriage means directing social change and not "forcing unwanted cultural values on people". Yes, many of those who oppose gay marriage will never be accepting of it regardless of what the law says. But they'll get replaced with new generations eventually and those who grow up in the next few decades are more likely to view being gay as something perfectly normal than what would be the case if there still existed discrimination by law. I agree that the legalisation of gay marriage reinforced homophobia in some people but I still believe that the overall effect on our society will be very positive in the long term bey1  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ♚Missy♚ said:

But that's really just a logical fallacy and doesn't apply to reality so why even bring it up?

Why is it a logical fallacy that doesn't apply to reality? bey1

You're saying your freedoms are being taken away if you can't marry another dude, your opponents are saying their freedoms are being taken away if they're forced to support it, what is different about the two sentiments? brit15 Both groups will preach to their own family of supporters with the same line of logic: we believe in something and we have the right to fight for it, we can't let those people walk over us, and they fail to make a relevant impression on the opposite group. What I'm saying is perfectly applicable to reality and absolutely relevant to bring up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, fab said:

Legalising gay marriage means directing social change and not "forcing unwanted cultural values on people". 

No it doesn't because it just gives those frustrated religious freaks more ammo to vote for Trump next time around brit0 The very success of Trump is because he has publicly dismissed the whole trend of federalization and is giving a platform to the arguments of those people that have already been subjected to what they think is a forcing of unwanted cultural values on them bey5 That's exactly what I've been saying from the beginning: just working out these laws and then ignoring the genuine anguish people are feeling about change is just setting up your own future demise. We need something more constructive than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Earth Ripper said:

That's because they believe they have a two thousand year old tradition that is morally superior to those 50/60 years of what we call progress eve1 

100% agreed. Imo the Constitution should be abolished, but that requires a separate discussion and I don't think it's relevant for this issue. The Constitution is still in place and people who oppose gay marriage make lots of use of it, so that's just a problem we have to face, and I like to believe that that problem can be faced by doing something different than simply mocking and insulting people who don't support our cause julia1 That's literally how simple my pov is, I don't know why it's spun into something different.

I already said I support the idea of the necessity of force for change, but I don't believe that the "enlightened rationalists" vs. "uneducated idiots" tension is a wise foundation to build that force onto lj1 I explicitly said that I'd like to see a combination of activism and a simultaneous taking seriously of the opposition, so all of that "you just want to wait until people wise up" reasoning is a complete misrepresentation of what I'm saying.

But you're trying to make it seem that by liberals wanting change, they're mocking conservatives - who are constantly known for oppressing large groups of people themselves nicki1

Why do you keep protecting a hateful group of people, attempting to normalize their opinions. Giving me "It's just locker talk teas to sexual assault comments" nicki1

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Infrared said:

But you're trying to make it seem that by liberals wanting change, they're mocking conservatives - who are constantly known for oppressing large groups of people themselves nicki1

Why do you keep protecting a hateful group of people, attempting to normalize their opinions. Giving me "It's just locker talk teas to sexual assault comments" nicki1

I don't think that one oppression legitimizes another, simple as that sha1 If we want to offer a different dish, we better serve it instead of just upholding the same dynamics. Real change in terms of equality and tolerance isn't real change when people are legally forced to be tolerant. I have the exact same stance about crime anyway lol, just because we have laws against theft doesn't keep people from stealing, there's a real issue underneath that fake control that still needs to be addressed and solved um2

And again with the myth of protecting people omg. In my first post I'm clearly advocating that states redefine marriage to include LGBT+ members, so I'm not protecting anyone, I just think this idea of progress as forcing people along with no respect for their genuinely felt emotions and opinions is a bad idea, why are y'all pretending that's some shocking statement omg xtina4 Like it or not, those religious freaks are actual people just like you and me who have a 24 hour day and genuinely believe that what they believe in is accurate, and more truthful and worthy than what we're saying and thinking. They had a childhood, they have hopes and dreams, they poop and drink too much and fall in love and get heartbroken, dehumanizing them as uneducated idiots who can't keep up with the times is just gonna create a platform for a much bigger dynamic of frustration and violence nat2 I believe there is a way to fight for change while also addressing the serious concerns of opponents and meeting them on a common ground, I don't care if people call that naive, I've seen it working in my own personal life way too much to believe it's impossible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Earth Ripper said:

I don't think that one oppression legitimizes another, simple as that sha1 If we want to offer a different dish, we better serve it instead of just upholding the same dynamics. Real change in terms of equality and tolerance isn't real change when people are legally forced to be tolerant. I have the exact same stance about crime anyway lol, just because we have laws against theft doesn't keep people from stealing, there's a real issue underneath that fake control that still needs to be addressed and solved um2

And again with the myth of protecting people omg. In my first post I'm clearly advocating that states redefine marriage to include LGBT+ members, so I'm not protecting anyone, I just think this idea of progress as forcing people along with no respect for their genuinely felt emotions and opinions is a bad idea, why are y'all pretending that's some shocking statement omg xtina4 Like it or not, those religious freaks are actual people just like you and me who have a 24 hour day and genuinely believe that what they believe in is accurate, and more truthful and worthy than what we're saying and thinking. They had a childhood, they have hopes and dreams, they poop and drink too much and fall in love and get heartbroken, dehumanizing them as uneducated idiots who can't keep up with the times is just gonna create a platform for a much bigger dynamic of frustration and violence nat2 I believe there is a way to fight for change while also addressing the serious concerns of opponents and meeting them on a common ground, I don't care if people call that naive, I've seen it working in my own personal life way too much to believe it's impossible.

No one said they aren't people or inferior nicki1 Gay marriage literally doesn't affect their will to live or disrupt their lives in any way nicki1

 

But you're making just hilarious statements (and don't even see the hypocrisy) in itself because laws in general are forced upon the people who live there. Without laws, society would go into choas nicki1

 

Progress isn't about waiting till people feel comfortable. You expect a burning bush to be lit by God and suddenly his followers will reconsider their thoughts? What life changing curriculum or life event will do something that hasn't been done now nicki1

 

Stop being so delusional sis. With you, they'd probably be no change, we'd be sitting in the dark ages nicki1

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Infrared said:

Progress isn't about waiting till people feel comfortable. You expect a burning bush to be lit by God and suddenly his followers will reconsider their thoughts? What life changing curriculum or life event will do something that hasn't been done now nicki1

I already had to repeat that I am actually preaching for an active fight for change and not for just waiting for progress to happen and you have consistently ignored that element in my posts bey5 So yeah, this conversation is going nowhere thanks to you.

Keep on pretending you're discussing with someone who wants to protect religious rights (even though I literally said we should focus our energy on uprooting people's religious beliefs with their own materials — again, nicely ignored, thank you) and who doesn't want to fight for equality (even though I went against Carson's belief in my first post and advocated for states legalizing gay marriage on their own, which protects the Constitution), but just don't quote me anymore because I'm not that guy, sorry sha1

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Earth Ripper said:

I already had to repeat that I am actually preaching for an active fight for change and not for just waiting for progress to happen and you have consistently ignored that element in my posts bey5 So yeah, this conversation is going nowhere thanks to you.

Keep on pretending you're discussing with someone who wants to protect religious rights (even though I literally said we should focus our energy on uprooting people's religious beliefs with their own materials — again, nicely ignored, thank you) and who doesn't want to fight for equality (even though I went against Carson's belief in my first post and advocated for states legalizing gay marriage on their own, which protects the Constitution), but just don't quote me anymore because I'm not that guy, sorry sha1

You're not that guy alot these days it seems nicki1

Making problematic statements, offering no solutions and then playing the victim. Trump wishes! xtina17

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Infrared said:

Making problematic statements, offering no solutions and then playing the victim. Trump wishes! xtina17

I'm not playing the victim, I'm offering clear, direct, and explicit examples of you not paying attention to what I'm saying and suggesting to end the conversation because of that nat2 I never said we should just wait for progress to happen on its own and yet you keep using that against me as if I did. That's just a horrible conversation, and that has nothing even to do with the "problematic statements" I brought up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Earth Ripper said:

I'm not playing the victim, I'm offering clear, direct, and explicit examples of you not paying attention to what I'm saying and suggesting to end the conversation because of that nat2 I never said we should just wait for progress to happen on its own and yet you keep using that against me as if I did. That's just a horrible conversation, and that has nothing even to do with the "problematic statements" I brought up.

You don't know how to direct your argument and say what you want to say and go through hoops and hurdles. Answer the fucking questions and stop deflecting ellie1

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Infrared said:

You don't know how to direct your argument and say what you want to say and go through hoops and hurdles. Answer the fucking questions and stop deflecting ellie1

I've been saying the exact same thing in every single reply tho sha1 I don't believe in progress that forces people along without taking into serious consideration their genuinely felt opposition. I've explained that in all possible color, you're just running with a few sentences and pretend I'm saying something I'm not. I literally said we should take religious points of view seriously and inform ourselves about them so we can uproot them from the ground up and later you found the way to say that I was protecting the rights of religious people um2 That is you deflecting and going through hoops and hurdles because you don't even have a point to make.

Ask me any question you like, I'll answer it, as long as that question isn't based on a misreading of my opinions, such as: "Why do you think progress will happen by just sitting around and doing nothing?" because I had to explicitly repeat to you already that that was not what I was saying at all nat2

Hilarious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Earth Ripper said:

I've been saying the exact same thing in every single reply tho sha1 I don't believe in progress that forces people along without taking into serious consideration their genuinely felt opposition. I've explained that in all possible color, you're just running with a few sentences and pretend I'm saying something I'm not. I literally said we should take religious points of view seriously and inform ourselves about them so we can uproot them from the ground up and later you found the way to say that I was protecting the rights of religious people um2 That is you deflecting and going through hoops and hurdles because you don't even have a point to make.

Ask me any question you like, I'll answer it, as long as that question isn't based on a misreading of my opinions, such as: "Why do you think progress will happen by just sitting around and doing nothing?" because I had to explicitly repeat to you already that that was not what I was saying at all nat2

Hilarious.

When did I say Why do you think progress will happen by just sitting around and doing nothing?   nicki1

I said what do you plan to educate to these people to shift their ideologies - or atleast become accepting of liberal ideas, especially when issues such are climate change, trans right, gun control, and terrorism are getting worse and need to be dealt with right away  nicki1

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Infrared said:

When did I say Why do you think progress will happen by just sitting around and doing nothing?   nicki1

That's clearly what you implied with these statements:

"Progress isn't about waiting till people feel comfortable. You expect a burning bush to be lit by God and suddenly his followers will reconsider their thoughts?"

"With you, they'd probably be no change, we'd be sitting in the dark ages"

"We can't wait around for millions of years"

etc.

um2

2 minutes ago, Infrared said:

I said what do you plan to educate to these people to shift their ideologies - or atleast become accepting of liberal ideas, especially when issues such are climate change, trans right, gun control, and terrorism are getting worse and need to be dealt with right away  nicki1

That's not what you ever asked in this tone or form, but now that you asked I'll just repeat what I've already written (to once again prove my point about how I've been saying the same thing over and over again and you're just a horrible reader):

"I'd like to see a combination of activism and a simultaneous taking seriously of the opposition"

"people who oppose change should be taken seriously, should be paid attention to and should be approached as people who have a genuine opinion that is not so easily overturned by force"

"There is a way of making change happen that doesn't leave an entire group of people out in the cold to plot their revenge"

"by taking their arguments seriously and getting informed about their own environment you can actually outsmart them a lot easier"

"I don't know what will help, but I know that this ain't helping and I think that's important enough to vocalize even without a specific counterplan"

sha1

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Earth Ripper said:

That's clearly what you implied with these statements:

"Progress isn't about waiting till people feel comfortable. You expect a burning bush to be lit by God and suddenly his followers will reconsider their thoughts?"

"With you, they'd probably be no change, we'd be sitting in the dark ages"

"We can't wait around for millions of years"

etc.

um2

That's not what you ever asked in this tone or form, but now that you asked I'll just repeat what I've already written (to once again prove my point about how I've been saying the same thing over and over again and you're just a horrible reader):

"I'd like to see a combination of activism and a simultaneous taking seriously of the opposition"

"people who oppose change should be taken seriously, should be paid attention to and should be approached as people who have a genuine opinion that is not so easily overturned by force"

"There is a way of making change happen that doesn't leave an entire group of people out in the cold to plot their revenge"

"by taking their arguments seriously and getting informed about their own environment you can actually outsmart them a lot easier"

"I don't know what will help, but I know that this ain't helping and I think that's important enough to vocalize even without a specific counterplan"

sha1

But you're not answering the question - and yes I did bring up that point in my posts  nicki1

There is a way of making change happen WHAT IS IT

should be approached as people who have a genuine opinion  HOW? Hasn't this been done for decades?

 

I don't know what will help, but I know that this ain't helping and I think that's important enough to vocalize even without a specific counterplan

 

That's like Republicans saying they want to repeal Obamacare and don't have a plan. Your argument is good on paper, but in real life - where we all seem to live, it's going to do jack shit. You can't make these statements then run away from committing to them. Who writes an essay with no evidence or answers to back up their issues nicki1

 

It's far better to enact change that some people won't like because guess what - people won't always like it, but it's better in the long run than trying to reach a middle ground that will take decades dead4  


No one said we're running away from Republicans or their supporters, but some issues need to be forced because the risks are more than just marriage - it's life and death. 

You honestly think the conservative Republicans have any idea what they're doing. They've had 6 years to come up with a replacement bill, and they've failed to do that 
nicki1 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Infrared said:

That's like Republicans saying they want to repeal Obamacare and don't have a plan. Your argument is good on paper, but in real life - where we all seem to live, it's going to do jack shit. You can't make these statements then run away from committing to them. Who writes an essay with no evidence or answers to back up their issues nicki1

But that's exactly what I've been saying about your ideal plans too xtina4 And I did bring up great examples, even ones I experienced myself: an increasingly fundamentalized Islam in a secular country that expected Muslims to abandon their religion over time. That expectation turned out to erupt in its opposite. I find many parallels in this "the uneducated idiots will change according to our superior standard" logic that has been applied so frequently (look at the Middle East rn lol), that is evidence to me that the current plan for progress isn't working and why shouldn't I point that out even if I don't know an alternative yet? nat2 I think there's value in deconstructing a narrative even if you can't replace it yet. Like I said: I believe people are creative enough to come up with better alternatives. I've seen my ideal work in small personal settings, I believe it can work on a larger scale too, it's that simple.

17 minutes ago, Infrared said:

It's far better to enact change that some people won't like because guess what - people won't always like it, but it's better in the long run than trying to reach a middle ground that will take decades dead4  

See, I don't necessarily believe that. If you're so hung up on evidence for claims, then why don't you bring up some facts for that assessment? sha1 Like I already said (and which you ignored): discrimination of African Americans is still a hot issue today despite political actions taken, crime does not recede with more strict legal regulation, pedophilia does not disappear by punishing child abuse — like I literally said: taking legal action is one (necessary) thing but underneath there's still an alive, brewing issue that needs more careful and subtle attention because it won't go away with a fake sense of control being placed over it aretha1 So no, there is actually no evidence you can bring to the table that proves that it's better in the long run to not try to reach a middle ground, and as long as you can't, my argument is at least theoretically valid.

And like I opened this thread with: even if we force tolerance towards gay marriage, that will not solve intolerance against the LGBT+ community, it will only increase a platform for frustrated people who feel unheard and deprived of their rights, which directly increases the chance of political revenge and personal violence, which is something none of y'all have responded to! That very risk is why I'm opposing that kind of "progress", haven't we seen the potential of that risk with Trump's fucking election? brit0 We need a different tactic imo, I don't know what that is yet, but I do think it's valuable to write a fucking essay about how this shit is not gonna work, and I'll remind you that I only wrote these "essays" in the first place because people were so horrified by me saying that states should decide about gay marriage separately, whether for or against, a very simple opinion that many non-homophobic, non-Republicans share with me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Earth Ripper said:

But that's exactly what I've been saying about your ideal plans too xtina4 And I did bring up great examples, even ones I experienced myself: an increasingly fundamentalized Islam in a secular country that expected Muslims to abandon their religion over time. That expectation turned out to erupt in its opposite. I find many parallels in this "the uneducated idiots will change according to our superior standard" logic that has been applied so frequently (look at the Middle East rn lol), that is evidence to me that the current plan for progress isn't working and why shouldn't I point that out even if I don't know an alternative yet? nat2 I think there's value in deconstructing a narrative even if you can't replace it yet. Like I said: I believe people are creative enough to come up with better alternatives. I've seen my ideal work in small personal settings, I believe it can work on a larger scale too, it's that simple.

See, I don't necessarily believe that. If you're so hung up on evidence for claims, then why don't you bring up some facts for that assessment? sha1 Like I already said (and which you ignored): discrimination of African Americans is still a hot issue today despite political actions taken, crime does not recede with more strict legal regulation, pedophilia does not disappear by punishing child abuse — like I literally said: taking legal action is one (necessary) thing but underneath there's still an alive, brewing issue that needs more careful and subtle attention because it won't go away with a fake sense of control being placed over it aretha1 So no, there is actually no evidence you can bring to the table that proves that it's better in the long run to not try to reach a middle ground, and as long as you can't, my argument is at least theoretically valid.

And like I opened this thread with: even if we force tolerance towards gay marriage, that will not solve intolerance against the LGBT+ community, it will only increase a platform for frustrated people who feel unheard and deprived of their rights, which directly increases the chance of political revenge, which is something none of y'all have responded to! That very risk is why I'm opposing that kind of "progress", haven't we seen the potential of that risk with Trump's fucking election? brit0 We need a different tactic imo, I don't know what that is yet, but I do think it's valuable to write a fucking essay about how this shit is not gonna work, and I'll remind you that I only wrote these "essays" in the first place because people were so horrified by me saying that states should decide about gay marriage separately, whether for or against, a very simple opinion that many non-homophobic, non-Republicans share with me.

ideal work in small personal settings, I believe it can work on a larger scale too nicki1

That's really not how politics works. That's usually how it fails.

 

I'm not saying change brings perfection - there will always be racial turmoil either way. But far more has been done by forcing change than waiting to get to it nicki1

Gay Marriage is a step in the right direction because over time, yes it may bring hate, but it'll also bring up conversations about why it's better nicki1 You keep pushing this one sided effort about change bringing hate, but perhaps change is the step to bring forth these conversations moo1 

Anyways we keep beating a dead horse - so I'd rather we move on at this point, because it seems like it's going nowhere 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Infrared said:

I'm not saying change brings perfection - there will always be racial turmoil either way. But far more has been done by forcing change than waiting to get to it nicki1

Again no evidence while you're constantly attacking me for providing no evidence and concrete facts even though I have chi1chi1

4 minutes ago, Infrared said:

Gay Marriage is a step in the right direction because over time, yes it may bring hate, but it'll also bring up conversations about why it's better nicki1 You keep pushing this one sided effort about change bringing hate, but perhaps change is the step to bring forth these conversations

Well, I actually agree with you there which you would've noticed if you had read my posts carefully cry1 I literally said I wanted states to legalize gay marriage and that I supported active activism but that this needs to join hands with serious approaching and considering of the people who feel abandoned and left out by those decisions and who, if isolated, could develop even more extreme political opinions and end up electing someone like Trump eve1 It's hilarious how you say I'm pushing a one-sided effort when I have literally and repeatedly said that we need both legal action and those conversations you magically bring up now fall5

So we actually agree, but you just didn't notice because you were too hung up on pretending I was a right wing idiot moo1 Congrats.

4 minutes ago, Infrared said:

I'd rather we move on at this point, because it seems like it's going nowhere 

Thanks to you indeed moo6

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Only americans think Marriage only exists in religion and in the constitution. ddddddddd news flash marriage isn't a concept that belongs to the state or to religion  Marriage exists all over the worl

Well, according to the Constitution it's up to states to define marriage, so no, gays don't have the right to redefine marriage, states themselves have that individual right lol  If some state wants t

No, it's very hard to change a Supreme Court decision. But you'll get stupid "religious, right to discriminate" laws    Anyways, I'm sure someone will bring up the same could be said about Af


  • Browsing now   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×