Sayalol said: Dark_Puddles said: With the asking the students if they would feel uncomfortable i presume that if over 50% said yes then they should not be allowed to come and if under 50% said Yes then they should? By the same standards shouldn't this be done about everything that could possibly make anyone feel uncomfortable? "Ugly people?", "Overweight people?" etc. Isn't this essentially how people vote on what is "moral" in society? U.S. wise anyways. Yeah pretty much but i'm saying it's wrong. |
 |
ESSWHY said: I love you too.Also, Defiance makes me cringe. |
Dark_Puddles said: Sayalol said: Dark_Puddles said: With the asking the students if they would feel uncomfortable i presume that if over 50% said yes then they should not be allowed to come and if under 50% said Yes then they should? By the same standards shouldn't this be done about everything that could possibly make anyone feel uncomfortable? "Ugly people?", "Overweight people?" etc. Isn't this essentially how people vote on what is "moral" in society? U.S. wise anyways. Yeah pretty much but I'm saying it's wrong. Society needs standards in order to survive. Fact is, they go with what the majority wants because they're higher numbers. You and I, for example, disagree with the school boards decision, how ever, it's really more relative by population. You and I do not have to live in this town, there for, we're not affected by that. The people in the town, however, are. That's why in the U.S., there are state and federal laws. Everyone in the U.S. has to live in the U.S., which has differing laws from other countries. At the same time, not everyone in the U.S. has to live in Texas. Which is why Texas has different laws compared to Indiana. We don't agree with it, but we're also not having to deal with the consequence either. |
 L2 Search - http://fc04.deviantart.com/fs48/f/2009/236/3/9/L2_Search_by_Siya_Akuma.jpg We're all getting trolled by Mayans. They probably thought "Fuck this shit, let's end the calendar and say shit's gonna go down." |
| Not surprised at all actually. That just goes to show how outrageously conservative the south is. That's a bummer for the school that this happened to. |
 |
Sayalol said: Dark_Puddles said: Sayalol said: Dark_Puddles said: With the asking the students if they would feel uncomfortable i presume that if over 50% said yes then they should not be allowed to come and if under 50% said Yes then they should? By the same standards shouldn't this be done about everything that could possibly make anyone feel uncomfortable? "Ugly people?", "Overweight people?" etc. Isn't this essentially how people vote on what is "moral" in society? U.S. wise anyways. Yeah pretty much but I'm saying it's wrong. Society needs standards in order to survive. Fact is, they go with what the majority wants because they're higher numbers. You and I, for example, disagree with the school boards decision, how ever, it's really more relative by population. You and I do not have to live in this town, there for, we're not affected by that. The people in the town, however, are. That's why in the U.S., there are state and federal laws. Everyone in the U.S. has to live in the U.S., which has differing laws from other countries. At the same time, not everyone in the U.S. has to live in Texas. Which is why Texas has different laws compared to Indiana. We don't agree with it, but we're also not having to deal with the consequence either. Yes society does need standards to survive and the majority rule wouldn't bother me as much if most of the people had reasons for thinking the way they do instead of just tradition, religion, parents ideas and stuff like that. And yes we don't have to deal with the consequences but it doesn't mean we should just shut up and let them do whatever they want. If we did pretty much all countries and even states would not allow any others to entre where they live. |
| |
Dark_Puddles said: Oh boy, now doesn't that sound dictatorial(not to mention hypocritical)? Sounds very similar to the very thing you are condemning lol.but it doesn't mean we should just shut up and let them do whatever they want. I think people try to make this out to be a civil rights issue when it is simply a formality issue. The fact that people can get so pissed off just because some dyke wasn't allowed to wear a tuxido to a school prom is baffling in all honesty. You people are making out to be as if they are trying to prosecute them for being gay or something lol. |
| America. Fuck Yeah. |
 |
Defiance said: Dark_Puddles said: Oh boy, now doesn't that sound dictatorial(not to mention hypocritical)? Sounds very similar to the very thing you are condemning lol.but it doesn't mean we should just shut up and let them do whatever they want. I think people try to make this out to be a civil rights issue when it is simply a formality issue. The fact that people can get so pissed off just because some dyke wasn't allowed to wear a tuxido to a school prom is baffling in all honesty. You people are making out to be as if they are trying to prosecute them for being gay or something lol. I never said we should just let people do what they want without good reason, i was saying that if a logical reason can't be given as to why they shouldn't be allowed to wear the tuxedo, then they should be able to. Your only reasons were tradition and modesty (which i don't get) i don't see either of them as logical and i can't think of any reasons myself. I never said anything about people not being able to voice their opinions, as i believe everyone can, i've been arguing against taking things away from people because they're not doing it the expected way JUST because it's expected. |
Dark_PuddlesApr 7, 2010 10:16 PM
| |
Dark_Puddles said: So basically your point is that you have been given reasons, but they are not reasons that you agree with. This is where my major problem with this is. You guys claim there is NO reason when you have been provided reasons, you just don't agree with them.Your only reasons were tradition and modesty (which i don't get) i don't see either of them as logical and i can't think of any reasons myself. What's even more funny though is that she was eventually allowed to attend an "official" school prom that only had like 7 people there, meanwhile an unofficial parent-sponsored prom was held elsewhere with basically the entire school. So yea, I guess you could say she got what she wanted, but not without alienating herself from the rest of her peers by creating the giant political fiasco(especially getting the ACLU involved).--link to blatantly bias new article(its a LBGT magazine >_>) |
Defiance said: Dark_Puddles said: So basically your point is that you have been given reasons, but they are not reasons that you agree with. This is where my major problem with this is. You guys claim there is NO reason when you have been provided reasons, you just don't agree with them.Your only reasons were tradition and modesty (which i don't get) i don't see either of them as logical and i can't think of any reasons myself. What's even more funny though is that she was eventually allowed to attend an "official" school prom that only had like 7 people there, meanwhile an unofficial parent-sponsored prom was held elsewhere with basically the entire school. So yea, I guess you could say she got what she wanted, but not without alienating herself from the rest of her peers by creating the giant political fiasco(especially getting the ACLU involved).--link to blatantly bias new article(its a LBGT magazine >_>) Not that i don't agree with them it's that tradition isn't actually a reason by you or anyone else it's just going along with what was "decided" in the past and as i said i don't get the modest thing in this context, i don't think wearing the tuxedo will get much attention and I can't imagine many people being offended by it, unless it's due to breaking tradition, which once again has not been giving a reason as to why it's there. |
Dark_PuddlesApr 7, 2010 11:07 PM
| |
Defiance said: political fiasco Justified. I don't even know where to start with your self righteous attacks on lesbians and defense of "tradition". |
 Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| Wow, how is a prom educational? Just give the couple a chance and let them be. If people are going to stare, they may as well bleed their eyes out. Who cares? |
ukonkivi said: The fact that you believe I'm "attacking" lesbians just shows how unsavvy you are to my argument in this discussion >_>.Defiance said: political fiasco Justified. I don't even know where to start with your self righteous attacks on lesbians and defense of "tradition". Of course, there is the possibility that as long as I don't have the same viewpoint as you, you will believe that I am a hate monger and "self righteous". Hypocrisy at its finest folks, MAL's great philosopher(or so he tends to act as) ukonkivi calling me "self righteous". EDIT: and yes, I would love to see you try to deny your egotistical/elitist attitude which you have displayed CONSTANTLY on MAL lol. |
DefianceApr 8, 2010 1:32 AM
Defiance said: The fact that you believe I'm "attacking" lesbians just shows how unsavvy you are to my argument in this discussion >_>. I'm sure you were using the word "dyke" in a totally endearing fashion. I may be mistaken, but you're basically ridiculing this couple for what is in your mind "going too far", like they don't have a good reason, while the people opposing them, clearly have understandable reasons for doing so. At least, that's the general impression your tone gives. Your treatment of the lesbian couple versus those who oppose them is clearly contrasted. Defiance said: MAL's great philosopher(or so he tends to act as) ukonkivi Good lordy this opinion has somehow come out a bit strong lately. Just out of the fact that I like talking about more controversial, or macrocosm matters like politics and nature vs. nurture debates and the like, where other people are just like "oh no, not [x subject] again, or make jokes the whole time. Everyone is just another person. Even people who like to namedrop Bakunin and Chomsky and talk about "big" issues to go along with their moeblob animu. I make a mistake, Chomsky makes a mistake. Anyone does, even if I haven't here, I feel like saying this because it's as if it's suddenly to be defame, a users YOU thought was intelligent, saying something THIS stupid, see I told you he wasn't smart, everyone gather round! Somewhere down the line I've been considered one of those MAL smarties and a philosopher. Lovely. I'll have to stop being so elitist and talking about subjects I find entertaining to talk about because of Mister Defiance-san. Really, thank you for the backhanded compliment. Pip pip old chap. Defiance said: EDIT: and yes, I would love to see you try to deny your egotistical/elitist attitude which you have displayed CONSTANTLY on MAL lol. Before I'd do something like that, I'd like to hear your argument for such a thing. I'd also like to move this conversation out of this thread, as it's completely off topic. I don't particularly find myself more egotistical or elitist than the average person, everyone has a little bit of push to their will. But I suppose that's how an egotistical person would feel. If you can push an good argument that my ego is bloated and needs to be taken down a notch, I'll definitely reconsider something about my feelings and opinions. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
ukonkivi said: I believed the word to be re-appropriated and didn't consider it to offend anyone. I'm sure you were using the word "dyke" in a totally endearing fashion. I may be mistaken, but you're basically ridiculing this couple for what is in your mind "going too far" How have I ridiculed them in any way? I have shown no offense to the people themselves, only the political subject they have surrounded themselves in.like they don't have a good reason You are correct, I do not believe they have a "good" reason for doing what they were trying to do.while the people opposing them, clearly have understandable reasons for doing so. Considering contemporary formal dress is gender specific, yes I believe so. At least, that's the general impression your tone gives. Your treatment of the lesbian couple versus those who oppose them is clearly contrasted. For reasons I have just listed I'm sure you can infer my response to this.I don't really feel like talking about the other part of your post because it is offtopic and it is plagued with sarcasm. But I will say that you have a nasty habit of talking down to people in the tone of an arrogant intellectual. Hell, half of your post just now was a sarcastic rant aimed to mock me. |
Defiance said: You are correct, I do not believe they have a "good" reason for doing what they were trying to do. Then like you said, that's "just your opinion". And people are plenty reasonable for disagreeing with your bias against homosexuals. You can hate black people and believe they should be enslaved for all I care. Indeed that's just your opinion. But the way you are arguing with Dark Puddles does not reflect that. Defiance said: Considering contemporary formal dress is gender specific, yes I believe so. That is the school pushing their subjective values onto the children of different values. It's one thing for them to disagree on traditions, it's another for them to enforce them. I personally oppose gender roles. They don't have to share that opinion. But a school shouldn't have the right to enforce gender roles any more than it should have the right to enforce This is a different level of moral, here. They have just as much right by the same standards and ideas to enforce something religious, or racial, in the name of "tradition". And in moral here we also have the concept of freedom versus tradition. Of course from a subjectivity acknowledging viewpoint slavery is not better or worse than hugging your mom when she says "I love You". But that means the lesbians here have just as good of reason for doing what they are as the opposition. And in fact, from a "freedom is good" viewpoint, the lesbians here are clearly in the right. From an "everything is subjective viewpoint", shooting you in the face for saying this stuff is no different from going to prom. That I understand things are subjective and "just different opinion" is perfect grounds for arguing back with you when you say what these girls did is unreasonable. That it's a good idea to shoot up a school is also just an opinion. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| .....why did I even get into this with you? I'm getting quite tired of the slanderous accusations. To say I have a bias against homosexuals is your own opinion and you are simply demonizing me to try to make your point. I'm done. |
| Yes, it's pretty clear that you do. And it's not for slander, it's for an example. If I treated it like it mattered at all for the point at hand, it would be a logical fallacy. The only point there is that I don't think you're treating the concept/fact that opinions are subjective logically. I could be mistaken, but that's where this argument is going and currently on. That you're focusing on that instead of addressing even anything else in the post, is bad debating. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| Here we go with the khorven talk >_>. Again, I don't even have the will to argue against you because you are just going to demonize me as a bigot lol. EDIT:You know what, you are absolutely right. Because I hold value in a traditional clothing dress code for a school prom, I therefore dislike/hate homosexuals. You win the debate, you can now bask in your intellectual victory over a lower being such as myself. |
DefianceApr 8, 2010 4:05 AM
Defiance said: Here we go with the khorven talk >_>. Again, I don't even have the will to argue against you because you are just going to demonize me as a bigot lol. Right, because stepping back and trying to clarify what is logical and not in a situation is just, not proper debate. And being compared to Khorven makes you wrong. It really doesn't matter whether you're a bigot or not. Perhaps I'm a bigot. I really don't care at this point, I'm searching for clarity of logic for the situation. What you're doing here is cheap and avoiding. And if you are the one who had been logical here and I was the one misunderstanding and/or doing something illogical, if we are to talk of being defaming, this doesn't reflect well on your argument to simply say someone sounds like khoven(oh no!) and is "just going to demonize me as a bigot!". That's not a decent rebuttal AT ALL. And if you were being logical and reasonable to begin with, this reflects horribly on that as it would be real simple to back such up properly in the future. For posterity, people will now be just as likely to see you doing nothing more than giving up. Saying "khorven talk" is ill defined. The tone expresses a perceived problem with a form of speech, assumedly as illogical. But gives no reason as to why such is/would be problematic. Defiance said: EDIT:You know what, you are absolutely right. Because I hold value in a traditional clothing dress code for a school prom, I therefore dislike/hate homosexuals. This was more from the dyke comment and perceived bias on what is "reasonable" and what is 'not'. On this dress thing, I would call you transphobic instead. Defiance said: You win the debate, you can now bask in your intellectual victory over a lower being such as myself. What was that about sarcasm? |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
ukonkivi said: Best to fight fire with fire, I don't plan on involving myself in your overly semantic argument lol.What was that about sarcasm? |
| We're not debating the meanings of words, we're getting down, or at least trying to on my side, get down to the gritty of what's a subjective opinion here on the reasonable and not, and what's objective. And you've defended your statements on the subjectivity of the viewpoints of the lesbian couple, the school, and gender roles and traditions simply horribly. By completely ignoring the subject and hand and playing victim while attacking me in various ways which imply I'm psuedo-intellectual like it's a decent, logical rebuttal and logically reinforces your claims about tradition and reasonability. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| Do tell me what I should believe. You are obviously the voice of reason. Clearly you have me figured out to the bone and I have no business arguing with such a great intellectual mind. Anything else I need to add to bring this stupid argument to a close and satiate your extreme need for whatever kind of victory you hope to accomplish here? Because you are not going to change my mind, so the easiest solution is for me to concede complete defeat and let you hear what you want to hear. I'm tired. I'm tired of this long winded meaningless argument that will change neither one of our minds and there is no reason for us to "attack" each other. Sadly enough though, you are probably too up on your high horse to even realize you have made personal attacks of your own and will recognize only those committed you. |
DefianceApr 8, 2010 5:11 AM
| Ha, hilarious, like the male school officials haven't masturbated to lesbains before. What a bunch of hypocrites. |
  |
| Wait are you guys seriously having an argument about some bumble fuck county in the united state's hate towards homos? Come on, really now? |
|
Defiance said: Clearly you have me figured out to the bone and I have no business arguing with such a great intellectual mind. I think the the majority of the point of this argument was to reach clarity on your viewpoint. You know, considered you said I had you wrong and the whole this was a "well, that's just, like, you opinion, man" thing. But suit yourself. I don't like being a "victor" so much as debating and challenging myself, to be honest. I like picking things apart and finding truth. And come on, someone sarcastically calling someone a victor isn't anywhere close to a debate "victory". Perhaps the biggest defeat I had was something that had a big effect on my life and was perhaps one of the most lengthy debated I'd ever faced in my whole life, one I've probably attention whored too many times here. And that's a race and intelligence controversy argument I lost over a year back that lasted for several months and I finally conceded that I actually had less in favor of sociological nurture cause for intelligence than the opposition side and that I was in fact as biased and fighting for a result I wanted to be true as my opposition. Even though my fellow antifa on the side of the debate kept blaming the opposing side of "having an agenda", we were equally trying to defend a belief. It's not some "simply, obvious science" like both sides seem to claim. The same, honestly, are my debates on gender/biological sex. Either my side or the biological determinist side could, in fact, be correct. I've also lost a few other arguments, but none of them have ever lasted as long and been as tiresome as that one. Honestly, it partially left me never wanting to ever think about race and IQ heritability ever again. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
272 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |