d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > My Views Have Moved A Bit To The Left
Prev1789101119Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jul 19 2020 01:35pm
Quote (excellence @ Jul 19 2020 02:32pm)
you (and millions of privileged lefties) repeatedly vote for candidates who have these views, and have wielded political power to codify or attempt to codify their views into law. then you yell at a German guy on the internet as if he’s the one to blame for lack of equality when it comes to the United States


Yep, I've spent my life voting for the person with XistenZ's positions because the alternative was people with far worse positions. In the primaries I've voted for people who marched for gay rights since the 70's, but in the general there's only two choices.
Member
Posts: 53,368
Joined: Sep 2 2004
Gold: 57.00
Jul 19 2020 01:39pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 19 Jul 2020 15:35)
Yep, I've spent my life voting for the person with XistenZ's positions because the alternative was people with far worse positions. In the primaries I've voted for people who marched for gay rights since the 70's, but in the general there's only two choices.

in 2016 only one serious candidate (not Trump, not Barnie) had wielded political power to enforce said anti-equality and despicable views on our population. Did you vote for that candidate when push came to shove?

bold: Prove it. There were zero alternative candidates with better views? And Romney doesn’t count because he’s a racist wannabe thug who is a carpetbagger that hates women and his dog.

This post was edited by excellence on Jul 19 2020 01:40pm
Member
Posts: 54,184
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Jul 19 2020 01:43pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 19 Jul 2020 21:26)
Bulshit dude. If you were not in favor of gay marriage you were in favor of discrimination. Period. Full stop. That's just how the definitions of these things work.

You can't say I'm in favor of civil rights but not in favor of allowing them to date white women. And that's exactly what you are doing

You literally just proved my exact claim.


Refusing to give someone special privileges is not discrimination as long as the rationale for these special privileges is not satisfied in the case at hand.

Marriage comes with special privileges that unmarried persons do not enjoy, and the idea behind this is that society has an interest in promoting stable and protected family units from which society can reasonably expect new generations to be raised under (hopefully) optimal conditions. My line of reasoning against gay marriage at the time was that gay couples could not have children and thus the rationale behind the special privileges associated with marriage did not apply to them. Over time, I understood that this argument falls apart when you consider adoption and childless hetero couples.

Like I said, I was wrong on that issue, and I'm not proud of the stance I had back then. Nonetheless, I have to vehemently disagree with the notion that my stance at the time came from a place of irrational bigotry.



Quote
I'm going to unload some knowledge about yourself. You are not somebody who actively engage has with and proactively considers the ramifications of your Social beliefs. In 10 years we will be having the exact same conversation about trans rights and it will be for the same reason we are having this conversation about gay rights.


"Trans rights" in the sense of "basic trans acceptance" will become the norm.

More absurd calls for special treatment, like trans people being allowed into athletic competition where they have an unfair advantage, or pre-surgery trans people being allowed into the toilets and dressing rooms of the opposite sex, or trans people wanting access to medical treatment for diseases they cannot possibly suffer from (e.g. cervical cancer in mtf trans persons) - this sort of stuff will never become the norm, will never be accepted by a big majority of society.

If I'm wrong with this prediction, feel free to call me out and perform a victory dance ten years from now! ;)
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jul 19 2020 01:49pm
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Jul 19 2020 02:43pm)
Refusing to give someone special privileges is not discrimination as long as the rationale for these special privileges is not satisfied in the case at hand.

Marriage comes with special privileges that unmarried persons do not enjoy, and the idea behind this is that society has an interest in promoting stable and protected family units from which society can reasonably expect new generations to be raised under (hopefully) optimal conditions. My line of reasoning against gay marriage at the time was that gay couples could not have children and thus the rationale behind the special privileges associated with marriage did not apply to them. Over time, I understood that this argument falls apart when you consider adoption and childless hetero couples.

Like I said, I was wrong on that issue, and I'm not proud of the stance I had back then. Nonetheless, I have to vehemently disagree with the notion that my stance at the time came from a place of irrational bigotry.

"Trans rights" in the sense of "basic trans acceptance" will become the norm.

More absurd calls for special treatment, like trans people being allowed into athletic competition where they have an unfair advantage, or pre-surgery trans people being allowed into the toilets and dressing rooms of the opposite sex, or trans people wanting access to medical treatment for diseases they cannot possibly suffer from (e.g. cervical cancer in mtf trans persons) - this sort of stuff will never become the norm, will never be accepted by a big majority of society.

If I'm wrong with this prediction, feel free to call me out and perform a victory dance ten years from now! ;)


I never claimed it came from "irrational bigotry", however it certainly was irrational since, as I said, you don't actively consider your positions and if you did you would have immediately seen that the argument falls apart. I think it's a mistake for you to think you were rationally convinced of the incorrectness of the argument, because if you were willing to consider the argument you would have seen it falls apart immediately. You were more likely convinced by the acceptance of your social circles and then rationalized it as realizing the arguments were incorrect.

Trans people being allowed into bathrooms is not special treatment. This is an argument you will find "falls apart on closer inspection" later on when your social circles accept trans people. As will other positions you have on trans issues, although probably not all of them since a good amount of what you said isn't even accepted in liberal circles, it's just trotted out by the people on the right to paint the issue as ridiculous.

Let me ask you this for the trans bathroom issue. How many dicks have you seen in a bathroom in your life? Personally, I've never seen another man's dick in a bathroom. Ever. I would have literally no way of knowing if a woman was in the bathroom with me. This is just a re-tread of "men will pretend to be gay to get marriage benefits!" argument.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jul 19 2020 01:52pm
Member
Posts: 54,184
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Jul 19 2020 02:07pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 19 Jul 2020 21:49)
I never claimed it came from "irrational bigotry", however it certainly was irrational since, as I said, you don't actively consider your positions and if you did you would have immediately seen that the argument falls apart. I think it's a mistake for you to think you were rationally convinced of the incorrectness of the argument, because if you were willing to consider the argument you would have seen it falls apart immediately. You were more likely convinced by the acceptance of your social circles and then rationalized it as realizing the arguments were incorrect.

Trans people being allowed into bathrooms is not special treatment. This is an argument you will find "falls apart on closer inspection" later on when your social circles accept trans people. As will other positions you have on trans issues, although probably not all of them since a good amount of what you said isn't even accepted in liberal circles, it's just trotted out by the people on the right to paint the issue as ridiculous.

Let me ask you this for the trans bathroom issue. How many dicks have you seen in a bathroom in your life? Personally, I've never seen another man's dick in a bathroom. Ever. I would have literally no way of knowing if a woman was in the bathroom with me. This is just a re-tread of "men will pretend to be gay to get marriage benefits!" argument.


Completely wrong on all accounts. One of my best friends since high school days is gay and we had lenghty and bitter disputes about gay marriage, and he brought up the adoption example early on. I did not hold the wrong position back then because of a lack of information or introspection, or because my social circle told me so. It simply took me time to realize that the arguments of the other side were more persuasive.

Side note: I'm a very contrarian and solitary guy, I was never in my life part of a large social circle, and I was never strongly influenced by the views of my few friends. Even back in middle school, I had viewpoints on an array of issues which went contrary to those of my classmates and teachers. If anything, a large consensus in the opinions of those around me prompts me to adopt the opposite viewpoint. I get where you're coming from based on my post history in PaRD, but I am definitely not some fool who's just uncritically following the lead of his reactionay social circle.



Regarding your point that what I "trotted out" is not even accepted in liberal circles: give it time. Almost all caricatures the right has painted of the woke, sjw-minded left have become reality sooner or later. Not that many years ago, stuff like "black reparations", "defund the police" or "abolish ICE" were absolute fringe stances even in liberal circles, and look where we're now.

Regarding the bathrooms: I've inadvertently seen plenty of dicks in bathrooms, maybe three dozens.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jul 19 2020 02:12pm
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Jul 19 2020 03:07pm)
Completely wrong on all accounts. One of my best friends since high school days is gay and we had lenghty and bitter disputes about gay marriage, and he brought up the adoption example early on. I did not hold the wrong position back then because of a lack of information or introspection, or because my social circle told me so. It simply took me time to realize that the arguments of the other side were more persuasive.

Side note: I'm a very contrarian and solitary guy, I was never in my life part of a large social circle, and I was never strongly influenced by the views of my few friends. Even back in middle school, I had viewpoints on an array of issues which went contrary to those of my classmates and teachers. If anything, a large consensus in the opinions of those around me prompts me to adopt the opposite viewpoint. I get where you're coming from based on my post history in PaRD, but I am definitely not some fool who's just uncritically following the lead of his reactionay social circle.

Regarding your point that what I "trotted out" is not even accepted in liberal circles: give it time. Almost all caricatures the right has painted of the woke, sjw-minded left have become reality sooner or later. Not that many years ago, stuff like "black reparations", "defund the police" or "abolish ICE" were absolute fringe stances even in liberal circles, and look where we're now.

Regarding the bathrooms: I've inadvertently seen plenty of dicks in bathrooms, maybe three dozens.


Nah, if you really think that you haven't paid attention to the right's talking points. Look at all the shit they talked about with Obama being elected. Defund the police is supported by police chiefs. It doesn't mean get rid of police, it means take some portion of their funding and put it towards more effective solutions, like social workers to respond to mental health crisis. Similarly, getting rid of ICE isn't getting rid of immigration enforcement. I find it funny that you're trying to find radical shit the left now accepts and you chose some pretty good and common sense solutions as your examples, almost like you aren't rationally considering them.


You need to stop staring at guys genitals in the bathroom man. I think you're that creepy guy that nobody wants to be in the bathroom with....

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jul 19 2020 02:12pm
Member
Posts: 54,184
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Jul 19 2020 02:15pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 19 Jul 2020 22:12)
Nah, if you really think that you haven't paid attention to the right's talking points. Look at all the shit they talked about with Obama being elected. Defund the police is supported by police chiefs. It doesn't mean get rid of police, it means take some portion of their funding and put it towards more effective solutions, like social workers to respond to mental health crisis. Similarly, getting rid of ICE isn't getting rid of immigration enforcement. I find it funny that you're trying to find radical shit the left now accepts and you chose some pretty good and common sense solutions as your examples, almost like you aren't rationally considering them.


You need to stop staring at guys genitals in the bathroom man. I think you're that creepy guy that nobody wants to be in the bathroom with....


A BLM activist in an opinion piece in the New York Times from just a couple of days ago: "Yes, we mean literally abolish the police"
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jul 19 2020 02:15pm
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jul 19 2020 02:16pm
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Jul 19 2020 03:15pm)
A BLM activist in an opinion piece in the New York Times from just a couple of days ago: "Yes, we mean literally abolish the police"
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html


Cool story bro. I can find an opinion piece to say literally anything.

Again, you aren't rationally considering things. Maybe you're right in that you are just overly-contrarian. Either way, your thought process is not a rational one.

Personally, I'm rational to a fault. Like to where I alienate most people because I'm asking them to dissect their thought process. I *cannot* do small talk and I cannot manipulate people.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jul 19 2020 02:18pm
Member
Posts: 54,184
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Jul 19 2020 02:29pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 19 Jul 2020 22:16)
Cool story bro. I can find an opinion piece to say literally anything.

Again, you aren't rationally considering things. Maybe you're right in that you are just overly-contrarian. Either way, your thought process is not a rational one.

Personally, I'm rational to a fault. Like to where I alienate most people because I'm asking them to dissect their thought process. I *cannot* do small talk and I cannot manipulate people.


Reforming the police or border enforcement would be rational. Literally abolishing it would be insanity.
I think your rationality is to your disadvantage on these particular issues. It makes you inclined to believe in the rational and benign interpretation of the slogans and imho causes you to underestimate the likelihood of the more problematic interpretation being true.

Member
Posts: 34,649
Joined: Jul 2 2007
Gold: 273.37
Jul 19 2020 02:36pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Jul 19 2020 04:12pm)
Nah, if you really think that you haven't paid attention to the right's talking points. Look at all the shit they talked about with Obama being elected. Defund the police is supported by police chiefs. It doesn't mean get rid of police, it means take some portion of their funding and put it towards more effective solutions, like social workers to respond to mental health crisis. Similarly, getting rid of ICE isn't getting rid of immigration enforcement. I find it funny that you're trying to find radical shit the left now accepts and you chose some pretty good and common sense solutions as your examples, almost like you aren't rationally considering them.


You need to stop staring at guys genitals in the bathroom man. I think you're that creepy guy that nobody wants to be in the bathroom with....


The National Association of Police Organizations just endorsed Trump.

"It's supported by police chiefs" is misdirection away from the fact that police overwhelmingly support the Republican position.

As for whether activists actually mean "defund the police", it seems like they intend to do exactly that.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.amp.html

Why would we get rid of ICE if we're literally going to replace it with a similar organization to enforce immigration?

If you disagree with these things, it's fine, they're juvenile, poorly thought out policy positions by hyper emotional and uneducated activists. But let's not pretend that Democrats really mean something different, anymore than "Jews will not replace us" is really just a criticism on modern Wall Street capitalism and changing social mores.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1789101119Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll