Lurker > Katanablade

BunkerBoy posted...

The responses he's getting are feeding into his victim complex
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/9/9397737e.jpg

Ha ha, whoever this person is, that's a pretty funny video there i think, i just watched it. Also the latest video they uploaded about someone having problems with watching Jeopardy because of their father is funny aswell

EPR-radar posted...

Person A forcing person B to live by the standards of person A's religion is bullshit, whether or not person A is a hypocrite.

The things that are published on Procon.org are not "forcing a way of living" on anybody. You can read those paragraphs and sentences on there that leave a sour taste in your mouth, and then just ignore it and move on.

Someone in this thread made a reply saying "That site is full of misinformation (meaning it contains things i dont personally agree with), imagine that being used in schools".

Ermmm when is politics and ethics ever a subject in school?. I was never taught those things in school, i was only taught things like English, Maths, Art, PE, Geography, History, Science.....you know.....the usual suspects

CSCA33 posted...

Providing a platform for hate

I would again refer you back to the holocaust example and why that is not appropriate to present "both sides" as if they are equal, and the same can be said about this side presenting hateful bigotry as a debate with a valid side. There is no merit to it. They might as well have a pro/con debate about owning slaves in the US civil war era. But again this is about what is socially acceptable and culturally relevant, and that is a problem which needs to be addressed.

Im not having a strawman debate with you, nor am i being a spokesperson for that site. They are probably going to be objective with some stances, like with the holocaust, and not allow discussion on it as if it were debateable, same goes with slave ownership. If you've got a problem with them allowing debate on abortion, then take it up with them, not me.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Well the very first time i read Procon.org is because i wanted to hear both sides to the argument on "should prostitution be decriminalised?", i wanted to reconsider my position on it, and because not everyone in the con section were pastors or ministers (most were secular people) from that first time experiance i came to the conclusion of "this site is secular".

I think you guys are cherry picking too much. Of course its going to be pastors and ministers mainly speaking in the con section of subjects like homosexuality or gay marriage, cause in the 21st century what secular arguments are there against homosexuality?, none. But there are with subjects like "con" for decriminalisation of prostitution or abortion.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Actually, that is not universally true about that site

When i read the debate on "should prostitution be decriminalised?", most people arguing in the "con" section were not pastors or ministers, they were secular people. One of them was a policeman. I deliberately made a point of remembering that one.

Scardude posted...

"In review, ProCon takes an issue such as gay marriage and breaks it down based on pros and cons, looking at both points of view. Each issue is well-researched and presents information in a factual and low-biased way."

I don't agree with what they may cover on the website as a whole but they aren't trying to skew your perception one way or the other. In the way you described them. Leave that to rest.

I couldent have put that better myself.

On the topic of Gay Marriage, if all they were doing was just showing the "con" arguments to it but didnt show any "pro's" that be a different story then. But as they are showing BOTH sides, i wouldent call it a site promoting hate. Its not publicising only the "con" stances to it and saying or implying "this is what you should believe about it". Its just allowing both sides to have a mouth piece, so i would say its a parley platform. Like i previously said, its called Procon.org, not Leftwing.org

Scardude posted...

To point out to others if procon is a reliable source.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/procon-org/

It's considered least bias with factual statements. As to the topic, there are some topics that do not have a moral or objective gray zone. To me, abortion shouldn't be on there or the holocaust. Some things are not debatable.

The holocaust is not up for discussion or debate on that site (ive had a look) so stop mentioning it, as thats strawmanning. Well, your entitled to your view on abortion, im not gonna debate with you

Funkydog posted...

Lol at claiming hate speech is the 'middle ground'

The site is offering itself as a parley, that's why it allows BOTH sides to speak on subjects. Its called Procon.org, not Leftwing.org

If Procon.org is not even addressing the holocaust, and is not allowing any stances on the subject that defend it, why do we even have to address it?.

And Antiyonder, i am not interested in having any debates with you on what subjects Procon.org is addressing and saying, thats not the reason i mentioned it. Im not being a spokes person for what other people have said

Antiyonder posted...

Perhaps, but then:

So should interracial marriages go back to being illegal since that's just the way it was for a long time (especially Alabama not waving said law until 2000)?

Yeah if a person gets a pass cause of status, how is that not seen as immoral? Just feels like a variation of a cop viewing crimes committed by a black person as worse than a white person committing them.

Dont ask me to be a spokes person for my countries government or the american government and make an argument for them.

All i was doing was just pointing out a fact, not trying to argue for it. Countries do give their own people more rights than those who emigrate to here. This is why those born here who commit absolutely atrocious crimes will not be deported to another country as a punishment, they will just be imprisoned or executed for it. And as im not against interracial marriage, im making no argument against what you said in your last paragraph

CSCA33 posted...

From your website that purports to be nonpartisan and presents "pros" and "cons" ostensibly to foster critical thinking -

on gay marriage:

This is hate speech dude, dressed up as legitimate debate points

Now please copy and paste everything that is written under "pro's" about gay marriage thats from that same website please?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

But vegans would argue to that and say "but your dietary choices are coming at the expenses of other living sentient beings"

Antiyonder posted...

But then why is it not equally worse for a born citizen to be committing those atrocious crimes?

Countries will give more rights to people that were born in that country, its just the way it is

Maybe there is no place to deport a born citizen gone bad to, but the problem with opposition to immigration is it acting like only outsiders are capable of causing problems or that is to say giving born citizens a pass in comparison.

You dont hear of many british born people (if any) going around the streets of the UK unprovokingly throwing acid or alkaline over a woman and her children, like an asylum seeker did recently. So yes, some crimes and atrocities are unique with them

I love the way people think that a website that is intended to be as middle ground as possible expects it to contain nothing but ethical stances they wholeheartedly agree with.

It does things like addresses the pro's and cons of legalising sex work/prostitution ect and lets both sides speak on it.

And those that are saying "there is no middle ground on abortion", they are doing exactly what militant vegans do, just come back with rhetorics that just appeals to their own sensibilities. Vegans see killing animals for food as an abomination, meat eaters dont, so they are never going to see eye to eye on the issue. Militant vegans say things like "i love the way people say i am a nasty horrible person for attacking people for choosing to eat meat. Who would you really say is the evilest person?, people that keep funding an industry that tortures exploits and murders innocent animals because of their taste pleasures, or someone like me who abstains from doing that, but sometimes when i address this atrocity to them, i say some horrible nasty things sometimes?"

People with pro choice views of course totally dismiss the idea that an unborn baby is valid life at all, so therefore no violation of human rights is being committed, so because of that they will never recognise any merit in the pro life stance and will make arguments to the pro life stances according to their own sensibilities.

LordMarshal posted...

Why would i go to an evil website?

Whys it evil?, or are you just being sarcastic there?. The site is very middle ground and is non partisan

I went and read it a fair bit on an ethical stance that i am actually middle ground on, the death penalty

Funkydog posted...

Sorry that wanting to strip half the world of a basic human right and their bodily autonomy is looked at as the utter evil it is and isn't allowed.

Not sorry btw.

There is a website called https://www.procon.org/ that choose to see the ethical stances on abortion by trying to hold a middle ground. The site is secular, so its not a case of that everybody who speaks in the "con" arguments are just pastors and ministers. They hold the middle ground with abortion by saying "it pits off one persons rights verses another persons rights"

Tenlaar posted...

Deported to where? Surely you have to realize this is nonsense.

I totally agree, they are not the same thing.

If you are allowed to immigrate to another country (especially one that will give you better quality of life), then that is a great privilege, its not a right, its a privilege. To be allowed to immigrate to another country, but then within days or weeks of being there you commit some really atrocious crime, you are biting the hand that feeds you. If you abuse or shit on a privilege, its not unfair if it gets taken away from you. Why should a country carry on welcoming you into its country if all you wanna do is be a social cancer to it?

SayHeyyShohei posted...

Why is everyone ignoring this nonsense?

I noticed it, but just chose to be quiet about it, until now.

I think the post you quoted actually proves the very point the TC was trying to make. So un-suaded are those people from considering oppositional viewpoints, that they believe that their stances are dogmatically correct.

Im centre wing myself, but there has been the odd time ive heard a left wing viewpoint on a subject and thought to myself "actually they've got a valid point there, i never considered that". But those people you will never get through to, because they stubbornly refuse to hear anything that goes outside of their narrative. I think Bruce Lee put it best

A wise man can learn more from a fool, than a fool can from a wise man

SayHeyyShohei posted...

What were the politics in Breaking Bad?

Thats a tv series not a video game

There's definitely been some in the tv series Vikings. For example they made the monarch of Kattegat be a black female. But according to actual history, that monarch of the same name was a white male. Then there was that time Floki had a blood lust towards Christians and he delighted in their deaths, but when they went to Spain, which during the viking age was colonised by Muslims, he admired them so much that he forbidded further killings of them. On IMDB message boards this got quite a bit of uproar.

Tenlaar posted...

Ive definitely noticed people being warned and having topics deleted for espousing right wing beliefs with no apparent TOS violations. Not long ago I saw it happen when somebody made a pro-life topic. Theres a bit of an echo in here.

Yep, saying there's no echo chamber in CE is like saying there's no french people in France.

The motto of that place should be "Go with the grain or go away"

People that do swatting need to end up in serious trouble for it, cause it endangers peoples lives and wastes alot of police time and resources. Especially when the reason they do it is because they dont like the political or social views that a complete stranger on the internet has

Flat earthers do just barf out "its all a conspiracy, the government have you indoctrinated and their playing you all like a piano", without putting any critical thinking into it at all.

First off, if it is just all a conspiracy by NASA and the US government, then all other governments and space stations through out the world would have to be in on it aswell.

Secondly, they gotta ask themselves the question "what benefit would the government get out of making the whole country believe that the earth is round, when its really flat?". A government is not going to try and make people believe something if they get nothing out of it at all.

I think in some video games, they make "appealing to today's standards" take precedence over historical accuracies.

Hogwarts Legacy is a great example of this. At one time in the game on a side quest, you meet a woman that tells you she is married to another woman. But the game is based in the very late 19th century, there were no same sex marriages back then, not in Scotland anyway. If there were anybody back then that was able to marry someone of their own gender, they wouldent have been open about it, they wouldent have gone around telling any old Tom Dick or Harry about it.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

The main issue, if anything, is that people stay within echo chambers where their beliefs aren't being challenged, but rather are reinforced.

I dont know if this was your intention or not, but you just described the CE board down to a T there.