Reed Rothchild | 9,600 Editorials Team · Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 16 minutes ago, m308gunner said: Have I stated my views on homosexuality? Could you quote them for me? I see. I'm not reading 19 pages again on myp phone so I'll assume you're saying you're either playing Devil's Advocate, or defending people whom you feel are being painted with broad strokes. I understand. I'm a part of a group (not religion) that has a reputation around my parts that is... let's say unsavory. I hate being judged like that. It isn't accurate of me at all. But I'd be a liar if I tried to tell myself that the the shit responsible for that reputation wasn't very real and frustrating. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 4 minutes ago, Reed Rothchild said: I see. I'm not reading 19 pages again on myp phone so I'll assume you're saying you're either playing Devil's Advocate, or defending people whom you feel are being painted with broad strokes. I understand. I'm a part of a group (not religion) that has a reputation around my parts that is... let's say unsavory. I hate being judged like that. It isn't accurate of me at all. But I'd be a liar if I tried to tell myself that the the shit responsible for that reputation wasn't very real and frustrating. I am trying to the utmost of my own very limited understanding and strength to bring a fair and balanced perception to the subjects at hand. I've had my perceptions of people, events, even reality shaken over the past couple years too many times to ever delve back into the old mode of assuming I knew what was in another human heart or mind (with a fair amount of trust issues and baggage to boot). And I can relate to your experiences in more ways than I have time to post right now. Good night VGS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arch_8ngel | 1,597 Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 37 minutes ago, Reed Rothchild said: I think you "presume" we're fools. That your views on homosexuality have become the minority one in the last couple decades, and to compensate for the swing in sentiments, the goal posts are trying to be moved. Is it a coincidence that the two posters in opposition here are Christians? That Arch's congregation is taking the most radical step possible over it? No, I don't think so. The split that is coming up in the United Methodist Church is going to be by church-body, in whole, and attempt to avoid splitting congregations into spin-off churches. Basically, churches that decide they don't want to conduct gay weddings or won't allow gay clergy are going to spin off and become "traditionalist methodist" versus UMC moving forward on the more open stance. I think it's a fascinating development, in that it forces the "traditionalists" to be the ones that have to deal with "leaving" rather than putting the majority of younger people in a position of wanting to leave over the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Link | 2,752 Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 9 hours ago, m308gunner said: Which sounds like more false equivalency and mind reading without any nuance or real understanding of an opposing view point. Would you care to elaborate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincoln | 230 Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 5 hours ago, m308gunner said: Because as we all know the best way to engender a stable and thriving society is to demonize and slander a huge swath of it. If all I knew of you was this line, and all I had was the dictionary definition of "bigot", I'd have to say you are what you seem to hate. Lol no this is so twisted. Homeosexuals are the victimized group. You don't get to blame people defending them and calling out bigots for their hateful views and actions. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincoln | 230 Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 4 hours ago, arch_8ngel said: The split that is coming up in the United Methodist Church is going to be by church-body, in whole, and attempt to avoid splitting congregations into spin-off churches. Basically, churches that decide they don't want to conduct gay weddings or won't allow gay clergy are going to spin off and become "traditionalist methodist" versus UMC moving forward on the more open stance. I think it's a fascinating development, in that it forces the "traditionalists" to be the ones that have to deal with "leaving" rather than putting the majority of younger people in a position of wanting to leave over the issue. My parents are elca lutheran and they were/are going through something similar. I think it was over allowing gay pastors a few years ago. Elca is already the I guess progressive version of lutheranism, vs my grandma's church that doesn't let women hold office. But this is a small rural town that's 99% white in a red state so some people couldn't handle that and stopped attending. It's not even that they had a gay pastor, just that it was allowed. I don't remember how it all turned out, I think there was talk of a split at the national level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodysGameRoom | 2,009 Posted January 13, 2020 Author Share Posted January 13, 2020 On 1/11/2020 at 5:03 PM, Tulpa said: Can we rename this the Current Events/World Politics/whatever thread (with the blessing of the OP) and just use it as a clearing house? OP Here. I'm in agreement with this. I think just Politics thread would be good enough. Despite some of the asinine and bigoted opinions I've seen in here, it seems to me we are getting through it well enough to keep discussing it. I only really log in during the week so I missed everthing you guys discussed this weekend, but I'll just say that it's pretty hard to put yourself in someone else's shoes. To make assumptions of which way someone chooses to be against gay marriage (which is also laughable by the way) is pretty presumptuous. It's even worse to make assumptions on how this makes gay people feel. Reed already mentioned it but it's not hypocritical to call someone a bigot when they are acting like one. Come on now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MachineCode | 159 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 On 1/12/2020 at 2:25 AM, Lincoln said: Lol no this is so twisted. Homeosexuals are the victimized group. You don't get to blame people defending them and calling out bigots for their hateful views and actions. I agree with you up to a point. There is nothing bigoted about simply calling people out for their intolerant and hateful views and actions. But, bigotry isn't a one sided deal and it is completely possible for someone who has the right intentions to take their rhetoric too far and end up engaging in bigotry. For example, say a conservative Christian type is spouting anti gay views and harassing gay people in their vicinity. A person who comes along and tells them that what they are doing is wrong, it will not be tolerated, and that they aren't welcome to stay where they are if that's what they are doing, isn't being bigoted. But, if instead that person came along knowing nothing about this individual personally and said something like "fuck yourself with a crucifix you bible thumping snake oil peddler. Why don't you take your inbred cousin wife back to your house of lies with the rest of the pedophile supporting scumbags in your death cult.", then that person would be engaging in bigotry themselves despite doing so in defense of another. Another is those that claim to be against racism but say all kinds of racist shit about white people without a hint of irony. Racism is racism and bigotry is bigotry no matter the target, speaker, or reason. Racists and bigots come in all different colors, ethnicities, genders, sexualities etc. You'll never fix racism and bigotry by using racism and bigotry. It's important to not become what you are railing against. Be better than the ignorant bigots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodysGameRoom | 2,009 Posted January 14, 2020 Author Share Posted January 14, 2020 9 hours ago, MachineCode said: all kinds of racist shit about white people You are confusing racial prejudice and racism. https://www.thoughtco.com/racism-vs-prejudice-3026086 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 On 1/12/2020 at 1:39 AM, Link said: Would you care to elaborate? I'd like to, but there's not enough time in the day right now to pull together all the necessary strings of psychology, theology, politics, morality and history to give a fuller context to those that want to just slap the "bigot" label on things and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 On 1/12/2020 at 2:25 AM, Lincoln said: Lol no this is so twisted. Homeosexuals are the victimized group. You don't get to blame people defending them and calling out bigots for their hateful views and actions. Victimizing the victimizers by assuming you have a 100% clear picture of what justice, history or another human's heart/mind looks like?... Can you point to one instance in history where that has ever produced something good for any society? Because I can point to probably half a dozen instances in the past century alone that resulted in face melting horrors, the ripples of which the world is still dealing with today. And before you say "We're just calling them out", the left has not shown it possesses the capacity for moderating it's own conduct in regards to how far or fast it wants to push it's agenda on society (which is another huge topic of discussion in it's own right). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 3 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said: You are confusing racial prejudice and racism. https://www.thoughtco.com/racism-vs-prejudice-3026086 My God... the first "takeaway" alone disqualifies the article from receiving any serious critique, never mind that it's full from stem to stern with postmodern neomarxist garbage. You do yourself a disservice if you seriously follow that ideology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincoln | 230 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 6 minutes ago, m308gunner said: Victimizing the victimizers by assuming you have a 100% clear picture of what justice, history or another human's heart/mind looks like?... Can you point to one instance in history where that has ever produced something good for any society? Because I can point to probably half a dozen instances in the past century alone that resulted in face melting horrors, the ripples of which the world is still dealing with today. And before you say "We're just calling them out", the left has not shown it possesses the capacity for moderating it's own conduct in regards to how far or fast it wants to push it's agenda on society (which is another huge topic of discussion in it's own right). Hearts and minds are irrelevant if your actions are hateful. And your constant broad accusations on the left are so generalized as to be meaningless at this point. Which is again Republican propaganda 101. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincoln | 230 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 1 minute ago, m308gunner said: My God... the first "takeaway" alone disqualifies the article from receiving any serious critique, never mind that it's full from stem to stern with postmodern neomarxist garbage. You do yourself a disservice if you seriously follow that ideology. I actually agree with this. Systematic racism requires an imbalance of power but any individual can be racist regardless of color or standing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 5 minutes ago, Lincoln said: Hearts and minds are irrelevant if your actions are hateful. And your constant broad accusations on the left are so generalized as to be meaningless at this point. Which is again Republican propaganda 101. The problem is you seem to be so CERTAIN that the people you paint are exactly as you think they are. Genocides have been committed in that spirit, and you don't seem to care. And I may appear to paint broadly due to time and how bleedingly obvious the issue I mentioned is. And trying to label anything I say as republican propaganda is not an argument. Just because someone who MIGHT be of an opposing political position from you says something doesn't mean it inherently has no validity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincoln | 230 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, m308gunner said: The problem is you seem to be so CERTAIN that the people you paint are exactly as you think they are. Genocides have been committed in that spirit, and you don't seem to care. And I may appear to paint broadly due to time and how bleedingly obvious the issue I mentioned is. And trying to label anything I say as republican propaganda is not an argument. Just because someone who MIGHT be of an opposing political position from you says something doesn't mean it inherently has no validity. It doesn't matter what I think people are when what they do is a very good indicator. Having and opposing viewpoint doesn't make your argument invalid. making broad statements that can't be reasonably proved or disputed is a problem though. Not that I'm innocent of that, I probably need to work on it too. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodysGameRoom | 2,009 Posted January 14, 2020 Author Share Posted January 14, 2020 31 minutes ago, m308gunner said: And before you say "We're just calling them out", the left has not shown it possesses the capacity for moderating it's own conduct in regards to how far or fast it wants to push it's agenda on society Please continue to shred any credibility you might have had. 22 minutes ago, m308gunner said: My God... the first "takeaway" alone disqualifies the article from receiving any serious critique, never mind that it's full from stem to stern with postmodern neomarxist garbage. You do yourself a disservice if you seriously follow that ideology. Feel free to discredit the article. The point remains that there is a huge difference between racial prejudice and racism. 20 minutes ago, Lincoln said: individual can be racist regardless of color or standing I agree with this BUT you can't be racist TOWARDS white people. Reverse Racism ISN'T a thing. There's a big difference and people try to paint it as the same thing. 14 minutes ago, m308gunner said: Just because someone who MIGHT be of an opposing political position from you says something doesn't mean it inherently has no validity. It does if their opinion is straight garbage. Such as having the "opinion" that being homosexual is a "lifestyle choice". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arch_8ngel | 1,597 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 (edited) 37 minutes ago, m308gunner said: My God... the first "takeaway" alone disqualifies the article from receiving any serious critique, never mind that it's full from stem to stern with postmodern neomarxist garbage. You do yourself a disservice if you seriously follow that ideology. Care to provide a specific rebuttal to the "takeaway" blurb that you find so objectionable. (seems like the article is mainly about "systemic racism" rather than the colloquial use of the term) Edited January 14, 2020 by arch_8ngel 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 22 minutes ago, arch_8ngel said: Care to provide a specific rebuttal to the "takeaway" blurb that you find so objectionable. (seems like the article is mainly about "systemic racism" rather than the colloquial use of the term) "Prejudice refers to a preconceived idea about a particular group, while racism involves an unequal distribution of power on the basis of race." The first warning should be the way they juxtapose the two terms prejudice and racism. One "refers", while the other "involves". It may be unintentional, but the framing to make the following ideas seem synonymous and equally valid in the context of the following article is misleading. The second, and biggest, is the idea that racism involves or results in a power dynamic, which is straight out of neomarxist thought - Every human interaction is a struggle for power, and the power hierarchy is the only thing that ultimately matters. After the fall of the soviet union, when many of the Marxist apologists in the west could no longer tow the line (because of the piles of dead bodies) they switched their tactic from a class/group based oppression game to an identity based oppression game, both of which are aimed at the human tendency to resent others because they have something you don't. Sound familiar? That is not to say that it has NEVER involved a power dynamic, but to try to state that it is intrinsic to racism is indicative that sociology has been compromised by said (provably failed) ideology. Third, prejudice and racism are not distinct ideas. They are often intertwined, no matter what a sociologist who's attempting to sell an ideology might tell you, and I would say that to be a racist would require prejudice. Also of note is that the definition they provide is apparently cherry picked to remove reason or experience and to support their assertions. Foe example, one can be prejudiced against all Christians because some Christians have been observed reacting or behaving in some observable manner (blame based on group identity being a favorite of Marxists). And since Christianity is not a race, racism doesn't apply, and so prejudice would have to be the definition one would use, and it would be based on reason and experience, for good or ill (mostly ill). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammerfestus | 3,900 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 1 hour ago, CodysGameRoom said: I agree with this BUT you can't be racist TOWARDS white people. Reverse Racism ISN'T a thing. There's a big difference and people try to paint it as the same thing. Uhh what? You sure as shit can. It’s not called “reverse racism” it’s called racism. Period. What was that you were saying about having garbage opinions? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodysGameRoom | 2,009 Posted January 14, 2020 Author Share Posted January 14, 2020 5 minutes ago, Hammerfestus said: Uhh what? You sure as shit can. It’s not called “reverse racism” it’s called racism. Period. What was that you were saying about having garbage opinions? Please review the difference between racial prejudice and racism. And check your privilege while you're at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammerfestus | 3,900 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said: Please review the difference between racial prejudice and racism. And check your privilege while you're at it. Check it for what? also, splitting hairs on what you know is not the generally used definition of a term just so you can “catch” people? Good job. You really won that one slick. Edited January 14, 2020 by Hammerfestus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodysGameRoom | 2,009 Posted January 14, 2020 Author Share Posted January 14, 2020 8 minutes ago, m308gunner said: blame based on group identity being a favorite of Marxists 2 hours ago, m308gunner said: the left has not shown it possesses the capacity for moderating it's own conduct in regards to how far or fast it wants to push it's agenda on society Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodysGameRoom | 2,009 Posted January 14, 2020 Author Share Posted January 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, Hammerfestus said: Check it for what? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege https://www.tolerance.org/magazine/fall-2018/what-is-white-privilege-really Educate yourself and then you'll understand why you you're wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammerfestus | 3,900 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 4 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege https://www.tolerance.org/magazine/fall-2018/what-is-white-privilege-really Educate yourself and then you'll understand why you you're wrong. Are you black? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts