posted
A hack piece, and what I'm beginning to think might be your style, oscfan17. If your style in the discussion about atheists is any indicator. We can continue with that discussion too, if you'd like.
Or we could have a discussion about this article, though that would require more than just a link.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The funny part, aside from your deeming that a burn, oscfan17, is that if one switched out a few words in your other discussion, the smug whining that this article, well, whines about, was entirely on your side. It's not cool to be an atheist-but atheism is growing-but I meant on parts of the Internet. They don't care about the need for meaning-but they do care-oh sure they care in a paragraph or two-but actually large portions of debate and books have referred to it-silence.
Of course if this *were* a Rakeesh attack thread, I would a) lament the quality of my antagonist and b) express my lack of surprise that you felt you needed another thread in which to attack.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: The funny part, aside from your deeming that a burn, oscfan17, is that if one switched out a few words in your other discussion, the smug whining that this article, well, whines about, was entirely on your side.
You are quite right.If you changed my wording, you can also change the tone of what I said. What other brilliant insights do you have you who most definitely does not feel attacked by this thread?
quote:Of course if this *were* a Rakeesh attack thread, I would a) lament the quality of my antagonist and b) express my lack of surprise that you felt you needed another thread in which to attack.
Or you would come swinging with personal attacks in your first post as you already did. *shrugs*
Posts: 31 | Registered: Apr 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, I gave you like half a dozen chances in your other thread not to be a hack. You doubled down every time. Don't whine now, just stop being a hack, and you'll be treated seriously. Not just by me.
Note: what was there to discuss, exactly? That entire link was a series of personal attacks on a group, for starters, so you're whining that I'm being too personal? You haven't read the work of atheists, did you read the link you posted?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Hey, I gave you like half a dozen chances in your other thread not to be a hack. You doubled down every time. Don't whine now, just stop being a hack, and you'll be treated seriously. Not just by me.
"I gave you a chance..." How generous. I really do believe that this dynamic where I care about your opinion and want to prove myself to you is in fact at play here. Posts: 31 | Registered: Apr 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Note: what was there to discuss, exactly? That entire link was a series of personal attacks on a group, for starters, so you're whining that I'm being too personal? You haven't read the work of atheists, did you read the link you posted?
Tell me: Are you someone more likely to favor boycotting a state because of its treatment of transexuals/gays (in the sense of not allowing transexuals to use women's restrooms and allowing bakeries to follow their religion) more than you are willing to boycott a state because its republican government denied medicare expansion? I think that point is worth thinking about. Smug liberals seem to lack a utilitarian perspective and favor bizarre causes that alienate the majority of the country rather than spending all that capital on causes that would make more people better off.
Posts: 31 | Registered: Apr 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, I've got no illusions about *that*. But you are whining about personal attacks, and so I replied that I treated you seriously until you made it clear you weren't worth being taken seriously.
My pointing out that you're a hack isn't because I think you crave my good opinion of you and want to deny it. It's because I think you're a hack, and don't like you enough not to say it. Don't reach so much into it.
Also, you're free of course at any point to actually discuss the link you posted. Now that's asking a lot, I realize, any details at all, so a gentle reminder seemed in order.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The ability of a bakery to follow its religion was never in threat. That is a manufactured boogeyman cooked up by people who have an unhealthy and un-American desire to blend their religion and politics.
Concerning transsexuals in bathrooms, I haven't ever heard any evidence that suggests would-be rapists have or are likely to use cross-dressing much less sex change surgery to rape women in bathrooms. If you've got anything demonstrating ofherwise, I'm all ears.
As for boycotting a state, speaking for myself I wouldn't for the insurance question. I would for the bigoted so-called bathroom law, yes. And I reject wholeheartedly the notion conservative republicans are trying to put forward that they are committed to protecting women. Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.
As for unpopular causes...my, goodness. Causes like gay marriage? Would-be moderates claimed for many years that it was too soon, that it alienated, that there were better causes. Here we are now. Kim Davis is rightly a laughingstock and gays can marry, and will be able to do so more and more.
Put that in your 'bizarre causes' pipe and smoke it.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: No, I've got no illusions about *that*. But you are whining about personal attacks, and so I replied that I treated you seriously until you made it clear you weren't worth being taken seriously.
My pointing out that you're a hack isn't because I think you crave my good opinion of you and want to deny it. It's because I think you're a hack, and don't like you enough not to say it. Don't reach so much into it.
Also, you're free of course at any point to actually discuss the link you posted. Now that's asking a lot, I realize, any details at all, so a gentle reminder seemed in order.
My statement mentioning the personal nature of your remarks were not a whine, just a description. It's a bit silly in 2016 to be whining about blowhards on the internet who use ad-hominems to buttress their empty headed notions.
Posts: 31 | Registered: Apr 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: As for unpopular causes...my, goodness. Causes like gay marriage? Would-be moderates claimed for many years that it was too soon, that it alienated, that there were better causes. Here we are now. Kim Davis is rightly a laughingstock and gays can marry, and will be able to do so more and more.
And perhaps this is why many "fly-over" whites are more eager to vote for Trump to vent their economic anxieties. There was a huge opportunity cost to spending so much political capital on pushing gay marriage that could have been spent on easing economic inequality, ending the drug war, fighting corporatism, etc, instead of alienating so much of the country for the benefit of 2% of the population who wanted their sexual predilections validated by the state as normal. This is why the Smug Liberal Elite are in part to blame for the rise of Trump and the divisiveness of our culture.
Posts: 31 | Registered: Apr 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Smug Style of Liberalism responds with sarcasm and bewilderment to the notion that most people regard transsexuals using the same restroom as their women and girls as vulgar.
One possible solution to the Bathroom War is to allow transsexuals to use women's restrooms, but only if they are "committed" transsexuals who are post-op rather than men who merely put on women's clothing in order to be perverts. However, it remains to be seen how such a fair compromise could be carried out.
Posts: 31 | Registered: Apr 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
That article was such a hack piece that you could change every instance referencing liberals to referencing conservatives and it would have the same dumb message (except then huff post would have posted it as an attack on conservatism)
quote:Originally posted by oscfan17: The Smug Style of Liberalism responds with sarcasm and bewilderment to the notion that most people regard transsexuals using the same restroom as their women and girls as vulgar.
One possible solution to the Bathroom War is to allow transsexuals to use women's restrooms, but only if they are "committed" transsexuals who are post-op rather than men who merely put on women's clothing in order to be perverts. However, it remains to be seen how such a fair compromise could be carried out.
Are you Orson Scott Card?
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, being a Smug Liberal Elite, I would like to think that providing you with information about why not all "committed" transsexuals are able to, should, or even want to have surgery would help keep you from making foolish suggestions. Clearly, though, that isn't the case.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Smug Style of Liberalism responds with sarcasm and bewilderment to the notion that most people regard transsexuals using the same restroom as their women and girls as vulgar.
For my own part, I AM baffled by this complaint. All else aside, why is it not a problem that transsexual men -- born with female genitalia -- might use the same restroom as my son?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by oscfan17: The Smug Style of Liberalism responds with sarcasm and bewilderment to the notion that most people regard transsexuals using the same restroom as their women and girls as vulgar.
This smug liberal finds the phrase "their women and girls" vulgar. Also the idea that anyone would be checking anyone else's genitalia in the restroom.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I should have caught on sooner but for some reason I was conflating him with zlghfksnghgkfjfhfj or whoever
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: [QB] The ability of a bakery to follow its religion was never in threat. That is a manufactured boogeyman cooked up by people who have an unhealthy and un-American desire to blend their religion and politics.
Ooh. Are we talking about bakeries? The biggest lesson learned is that if you are a defendant in a suit, do not post the plantiff's address on the internet and tell your facebook followers to harass said plaintiff.
Good lesson, that.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ah, smugness. Every time a southern accent is mocked, a Republican is born. The Left has become horribly classist and driven away many who would otherwise support it. It's easy, meaninglessly easy, to "Love and Tolerate" people like yourself. It's a lot harder - and a lot more rewarding - to do so when they look and sound differently. There wouldn't be so much of this toxic siege mentality if Liberals were willing to talk with people instead of to them. As a liberal myself, it infuriates me. The first big step on the road to disaster is believing oneself invincible.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Apr 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Veylon: It's easy, meaninglessly easy, to "Love and Tolerate" people like yourself. It's a lot harder - and a lot more rewarding - to do so when they look and sound differently.
if anyone seriously suggests that the american left is doing a a worse job of this than conservatives, you can safely approach their arguments as being completely deluded
only one of these two ideological groups is presently jockeying with whether to elect a man who literally wants to build a 40 billion dollar wall between them and people who look and sound differently, or a different man who wants to turn america into a theocracy for the benefit of those who worship correctly.Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
zlogdanbr
unregistered
posted
While I cannot really comment on the Left in USA, our Left is a complete waste of time.
This is the wonderful team "heading" Brazil in the last 13 years. Heading is a force of expression because what they did was to sink down the country in muddy waters. The very fact of mentioning of the Brazilian left means out of question in a sane world.
IP: Logged |
posted
It was a bloated article that really droned on and on... but there were a couple of nuggets of an idea there that the author danced around but really didn't get to enough.
The "smug tone" has contributed to the divide in this country, preventing people from really engaging with the ideas on the other side of the aisle - and yes, on both sides of the line. The Facebook echo chamber exists for both, whether it's "dumb hick" memes or "dumb librul" memes. The net is rife with ad hominem and straw man arguments that serve only to agitate the other side, rather than convince.
It also completely misses the role of social media... what it attributes to "smugness" can also be attributed to the narrative no longer being controlled by the talking heads on the news stations and in the newspapers. There used to be gatekeepers to the dissemination of information and opinion... but no longer. Post a funny image that strikes a cord with the id of a liberal or conservative person, and with a click that information is passed on to large spheres of people... whereas before, it might have been met with a chuckle and a "we can't run/print that".
The article didn't really make a point - at least not a strong one. It took a long (long) and circuitous route to present supporting points... and then didn't ultimately use that support to make a case for anything.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
i assume perhaps unfairly that the brazilian left is as 'fun' and 'capable' as the venezuelan left
aka a rolling ball of madness threatening the stability of an entire country
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
zlogdanbr
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: i assume perhaps unfairly that the brazilian left is as 'fun' and 'capable' as the venezuelan left
aka a rolling ball of madness threatening the stability of an entire country
Definitely. Venezuelan and Brazilian lefts are not just aligned/allied philosophically but they are supporting each other both economically and internationally. Well, please add to the pack Bolivia, Equator and Uruguay.
IP: Logged |
posted
well at least you can take some comfort in that your guys's left isn't failing as absolutely spectacularly as the besotted, godawful mess in venezuela
but get real worried if toilet paper starts getting rationed
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:if anyone seriously suggests that the american left is doing a a worse job of this than conservatives, you can safely approach their arguments as being completely deluded
This is a good chunk of why I am on the Left and why the Right has been in such trouble lately. But merely being somewhat less bad than the alternative is different than being good.
The Left has had a nasty habit lately of burning bridges with anyone a hair out of line on certain issues and is in danger of looking absurd and losing credibility much the same way the evangelicals did. Refusing to compromise is the same as refusing to have allies. And you need allies.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Apr 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
You rather badly miss the point when you label 'the Left' as some sort of unified group like evangelicals. That's even more specific than saying 'the religious right' which is *itself* more specific than saying 'the Right' when discussing American politics.
So on the one hand for the purposes of criticism, 'the Left' is all lumped together and the comparison is evangelicals-which is two layers more specific, and thus much closer to being a unified group that can be discussed that way.
You should narrow your focus. For example we could talk about the left and Midwestern or southern poor or lower middle class voters, and the reasons why the freaking Koch brothers and Donald Trump, three people who for god's sake have no interest in advancing the rights and status of these voter groups and yet somehow have those same voters believing they do. How much has the left lost its way in terms of support for labor, for example, or investment in the poor? To what extent did this have to do with smugness over social issues?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Case in point/: which issues?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
zlogdanbr
unregistered
posted
If the left means being a worker as in the French revolution connotation and that I care for the poor so I am left. If left means that I should laureate and glorify Marxism, Fidel Castro, old Soviet Union and all deluded theorists and empirical practitioners of this so I am not left at all.
Actually the very fact that I am part of a 35% minority in Brazilian society defined as middle class unequivocally defines me, according to my beloved government, as "the white elite" even though my heritages came from lots of different places and the real elite are the 1% richest. And if I dare to question the morality and ethics of a group of people loudly preaching that "we are stealing public money and accepting and paying bribes so we can save the poor and hell yeah we deserve a good share of what we steal because we are so good and human" so I am turned into their eyes, the wonderful Brazilian and Latin American left, into the vilest Right, a real enemy of the state and against the proletariat's revolution.
IP: Logged |
posted
This is a response to recent and not so recent opinions stated by Orson Scott Card regarding the supposed "hate" propaganda wielded by the politically correct left. In particular, I will be addressing gay marriage, the North Carolina bathroom issue and global warming.
All citizens should have the right to marry. Treating the union as a holy sacrament which should be denied to citizens based on sexual orientation is intolerant. If you have religious reasons for feeling otherwise, they should not be used to oppose what other citizens desire. Imagine not being allowed to marry the love of your life, or being told that your union is somehow not the same as real marriage. This is bigotry, pure and simple. In the future, I am sure that people will feel ashamed at how we denied same sex marriage in the same way we feel shame about the opposition toward inter-racial marriages.
This brings me to the North Carolina bathroom law. Orson Scott Card stated that women are somehow put in a position of not feeling safe, since any man, claiming to identify as being female can use the women's bathroom. Well, I don't really think there is going to be a surge of sexual predators dressing up as women lurking in public washrooms. As a woman, I do not feel in danger over this. However, someone who has changed sex, but does not yet have an updated birth certificate, or has not fully transitioned is now forced to use the wrong washroom. Is this sensible? I would be surprised to see a man with me in a public washroom. If he was born a woman, and changed sex, this is what is going to happen. It is already happening, as transgender people are being forced to explain to some confused fellow washroom goers why they are in the "wrong" washroom. But really, isn't this all a little silly? Is North Carolina going to have security people hanging around public washrooms, asking to see ID? This is an issue of tolerance and not one of "the Left" spewing hatred.
Finally, I would like to address the Global Warming issue. Orson Scott Card has stated many times that the issue is one of faith, not science. He has claimed that there is zero evidence that we are causing global warming. Every credible scientist says otherwise. The science is not complicated. We are pouring greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, which is warming the planet. This began happening at the point industry and large amounts of cattle became the norm. It has been proven over and over again. Orson Scott Card often asks people to do more fact checking, but I'm afraid he is the one who needs to take a closer look at the science. The idea that we are being hoodwinked by environmentalists who want to take down the oil and gas industries is ridiculously paranoid. That would be quite the conspiracy. We cannot afford to ignore global warming. We can change things if we have the will, but stating that the problem does not exist is irresponsible, and dangerous. Orson Scott Card is a science fiction writer. He is an intelligent human being. I can't quite get why he vehemently opposes this issue.
Yes, the politically correct agenda can go too far. Holiday tree anyone? The above issues, however, are certainly not in this camp. I felt the need to refute Orson Scott Card on these ideas, as despite what he claims, his ideas on sexual identification are intolerant, and his stand on global warming is scientifically wrong-headed.
Posts: 1 | Registered: Apr 2016
| IP: Logged |
zlogdanbr
unregistered
posted
It didn't take me 4 seconds to find counter evidence to global warming at Google. Still I could find that 97% scientists agree that the issue exists. Still you have 3%.
Back in 19th century scientists believed in the ether and did not even have a clue that relativity and quantum physics would change our lives. Not that this proves anything it is that I simply do not think OSC is a lunatic because he opposes the idea.
I must tell you that it did quite offend me that OSC did hate School of Rock ( which I really love ) ( This is a joke people ;-) )
IP: Logged |
posted
someone is not necessarily a lunatic because they oppose the idea, but there is a point at which some people's arguments against global warming become ridiculous in their incredulous and selective acceptance of scientific inquiry.
osc's arguments against the 'global warmists' - as has been established in a lot of concretely referenceable ways by his articles - are ridiculous and do seem stereotypically paranoid in the motives he ascribes to a worldwide consensus of climatologists.
it's not an issue of whether or not he has access to the information anymore, it's how he chooses to reject the scientific consensus and (most importantly) the denigrating things he says about the people who accept the scientific consensus.
so, yeah, you don't become a lunatic for not believing in global warming, but some people have lunatic arguments against global warming and just won't quit them even after a reasonable threshold of scientific confidence is readily available.
see also: creationists
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
zlogdanbr
unregistered
posted
Still in the topic "Weird and bizarre Communists taken seriously here in Brazil".
Mauro Iasi, a wonderful and sweet person. Former Communist candidate for Brazilian presidency has public advocated that "the Right and conservatives should be shot". It seems he quoted Brecht to an audience that went flabbergasted after the declaration and heavily applauded him.
IP: Logged |
zlogdanbr
unregistered
posted
Another sweet character is "beautiful soul" Maria do Rosario.
Currently a congresswoman who is a "strong" proponent of Human rights and was actually the Brazilian minister for Human Rights in the past. Back in 2003, a 16 years old lad, killed two kids who went camping in the mountains here in Sao Paulo. Well, the boy he has just beat him to dead and simply gave him some gunshots. Well, what he did to the girl makes me cry every time I think about. He has raped her for 6 days and once he found himself "pleased", he has stabbed and decapitated her. The beautiful Maria came to public to defend this killer because according to her he did not know what he was doing because he was a child and said publicly that she would sue anyone who felt rage against the "poor boy" who was 16. Now he is 27 and he has killed more 3 people. If one dares to question her she will use some adjectives like "bigot, racist, misogynist".
Beautiful Maria is the maximum example of human rights among the liberals here. Wonderful person.
IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
( This is a joke people ;-) )
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
