-->
@oromagi
Why are you here at DART? Seriously. Why!
It’s clear you’re neither interested in legit debates/discussions, nor are you equipped to do so.
Asking for a friend.
My Challenge.
Posts
Total:
114
-->
@TWS1405_2
Boogity boogity BOO!
-->
@Sidewalker
I see. So you’re just here to troll. Duly noted.
Perhaps the powers that he should consider pulling a polytheistic witch move on you, orogami, and IWantRoselveltAgain. Personally I see absolutely zero contribution to DART coming from either of you. Zero. Nada. Zilch.
-->
@oromagi
[oromagi] LOL- Yeah, sometimes, I lose track of the who in all the back and forth.
The story twists yet again, I just reviewed the full history and I was right the first time. I wrote (now with full and still correct tagging):
[TWS1405_2] Other species are irrelevant. They don’t possess sentience like human beings. They operate on innate pleasure principles, they don’t think about it, they just do.
- [oromagi] You missed the point. Ideology is exclusively human. If humans share a trait with most animals, that trait is not an ideology.
[TWS1405_2] The ideology is rooted in mental emotions rooted in physical pleasure (what Freud called the Id). The ideology is the theory derived from the emotive thought process, the physical pleasure is purely instinctual (i.e., innate). So no, it is to YOU who MISSED the POINT! Human beings are animals too, so naturally we will share some traits with other animal species. We love. Cats love. Dogs love. But we do not love all the same way, but we recognize the emotion amongst our species. Doesn’t mean we go up to other people and squirt our eyes at them before we smell their butts.[ADOL] No, it's you who missed the point. Dogs don't have ideology. If the claim is that a behavior must arise from ideology and it arises in animals that is false.It is not proof however that it does not arise from ideology. Non-humans kill, that doesn't mean human killing can't arise from ideology.
You thought that my italic was responding to your underlined, but it was responding to TWS's bolded. So this exchange of genius is:
[oromagi] You missed the point.
[TWS1405_2] So no, it is to YOU who MISSED the POINT!
[ADOL] No, it's you (TWS) who missed the point.
All clear? Now I'm going to bed.
-->
@TWS1405_2
I see. So you’re just here to troll. Duly noted.Perhaps the powers that he should consider pulling a polytheistic witch move on you, orogami, and IWantRoselveltAgain. Personally I see absolutely zero contribution to DART coming from either of you. Zero. Nada. Zilch.
You need someone to hate.
You're welcome.
-->
@Sidewalker
Non sequitur. Go figure. 🥱 🙄
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
What specific experience are you talking about? Having unusual sexual desires? That's not even part of the definition of "trans" (although definitions and that movement have a complicated relationship).
- Exactly- it's hard to imagine a more diverse group than LGB much less throwing T in there. I've always hated the initialism and thought Queer was more inclusive and on point. The shared experience is being the sexual outsider within the hypocritically prudish American experience.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
No, cause your review failed you.
Try again. Read what I wrote to O and then get back to me.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
What specific experience are you talking about? Having unusual sexual desires? That's not even part of the definition of "trans" (although definitions and that movement have a complicated relationship).
No one said it was or even included it in the definition. You’re reaching. Rather, overreaching. And you’re starting to demonstrate that your reading comprehension skills are no better than O’s. 🙄
-->
@Best.Korea
You see, BK.
The body is genetically pre-programmed,
Something that you have no control over.
If you like, something that GOD did for you.
And so GOD programmed you with the constant innate desire to procreate.
Unfortunately though, GOD never really provided the circumstances whereby procreation on demand was readily available.
So we therefore were also presented with the circumstances by GOD, whereby we had balls full of jiz and a head full of sex and nothing to inseminate.
So where to go GOD?
Instruction manual not really helpful.
And of course, the females of the species are different, but also infused with the same innate instruction to procreate.
You never really mention or worry unduly about Lesbian sex though. (Perhaps a bit of a turn on)
As for diseases'
Well, GOD provided for them too.
And every aspect of our lives, leaves us vulnerable to unwanted attention from pesky pathogens.
But just as we learned how to cope with the stresses of pesky penis urges, we also learned how to cope with the possible problems presented by pesky pathogens.
Thanks be to GOD for giving us the ability and opportunity to work things out for ourselves.
GOD: Not necessarily the floaty about bloke from Judea. Alternative ideas are available.
-->
@oromagi
[ADOL] What specific experience are you talking about? Having unusual sexual desires? That's not even part of the definition of "trans" (although definitions and that movement have a complicated relationship).
- [oromagi] Exactly- it's hard to imagine a more diverse group than LGB much less throwing T in there. I've always hated the initialism and thought Queer was more inclusive and on point. The shared experience is being the sexual outsider within the hypocritically prudish American experience.
Alright for the purposes of our discussion queers and LGBT people are: All people sharing the experience of being the sexual outsider within hypocritically prudish American experience.
Earlier you said:
[oromagi] LGBT is obviously not an ideology but a way of describing an extrememly diverse group of people who have little in common with one another except a shared oppression and need for civil rights protection.
That's a bit more specific than "sexual outsider".
In theory there could be sexual outsiders who are not oppressed and are in no need of civil rights protections, correct?
THESIS: LGBTQ is an idealogy that goes against science.
P1: An idealogy is a belief system, political philosophy, or worldview.
P2: LGBTQ is not a belief system, poltical philosophy, or worldview.
C1: Therefore, LGBTQ is not an idealogy
LGBTQ includes people embracing every possible belief system, political philosophy, and worldview throughout history but does not, can not, represent any particular belief. Trump's mentor, Roy Cohn devoted his whole carreer trying to destroy LGBTQ people while also desperately, secretly trying to get fucked by every young man in New York. Roy Cohn did not share any particular belief with the LGBTQ community but nevertheless, Roy Cohn was LGBTQ.
Lesbian, Gay, etc are adjectives used to describe people.
Lesbiansim describes same sex attraction between women- not any belief or philosophy about same sex attraction
To say that LGBTQ is an ideology is to misunderstand the definition of LGBTQ, ideology, or both concepts. Since LGBTQ is not an idealogy, YouFound_Lxam's thesis stands disproved.
P1: No human trait described by biologists as normal goes against science.
P2: BIologists have concluded that LGBTQ are natural and normal expressions of human sexual identity and gender.
C1: Therefore, LGBTQ does not go against science.
Sexual orientation and gender identity are complex and multifaceted, and there is a growing body of scientific evidence that suggests that they are not choices, but rather are deeply ingrained aspects of a person's identity.
Studies show that sexual orientation and gender identity are not a result of any single factor, but rather are influenced by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental factors. Additionally, research has shown that LGBTQ+ individuals are no more likely to experience mental health problems than non-LGBTQ+ individuals, and that attempts to change someone's sexual orientation or gender identity can be harmful and ineffective.
There is no scientific basis for discrimination against individuals based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.
LGBTQ are only a people and not an ideology. YouFound_Lxam's call for eradicaton is an ideology of hate that historically has gotten millions of good people murdered.
-->
@TWS1405_2
-->@<<<oromagi>>>Why are you here at DART? Seriously. Why!It’s clear you’re neither interested in legit debates/discussions, nor are you equipped to do so.Asking for a friend.
Everytime one of you dimwitted white supremacists loses control, Wylted gives me a blowjob. He's trying to improve web traffic on the "Raiders of the Lost Ark Priniciple": everybody loves watching a NAZI's head explode.
-->
@oromagi
Everytime one of you dimwitted white supremacists loses control, Wylted gives me a blowjob. He's trying to improve web traffic on the "Raiders of the Lost Ark Priniciple": everybody loves watching a NAZI's head explode.
typical liberal whiny retort…name calling “white supremacists” and “NAZI”!!! = concrete evidence you lost the debate/discussion due to a lack of emotional and intellectual intelligence. Duly noted.
-->
@oromagi
THESIS: LGBTQ is an idealogy that goes against science.P1: An idealogy is a belief system, political philosophy, or worldview.P2: LGBTQ is not a belief system, poltical philosophy, or worldview.C1: Therefore, LGBTQ is not an idealogyLGBTQ includes people embracing every possible belief system, political philosophy, and worldview throughout history but does not, can not, represent any particular belief.
When you begin an argument on a false premise, your conclusion isn equallly false.
You’re not using the correct definition of ideology, yet again.
There is an ideology promulgated by those within the alphabet soup mental basket cases:
“Gender ideology consists in denying that the differences between men and women have natural and biological foundations. Instead, this thinking proposes that these differences are the fruit of a social and cultural construction. It alleges that society and culture impose their respective roles on men and women, none of which corresponds to natural differences between the sexes.
From this erroneous start its adherents affirm that sex itself is biological, but gender identity is what a person decides to adopt. Therefore, there may be a number of different “genders,” the list potentially as extensive as the number of people inhabiting the planet.”
From this erroneous start its adherents affirm that sex itself is biological, but gender identity is what a person decides to adopt. Therefore, there may be a number of different “genders,” the list potentially as extensive as the number of people inhabiting the planet.”
-->
@TWS1405_2
You’re not using the correct definition of ideology, yet again.
When defining words, good debaters strive to use dictionaries with a reputation for objectivity. Bad debaters start with the definiton they want and look until they find a definition that reinforces their bias.
The Cambridge Dictionary defines IDEOLOGY [noun] as "a set of beliefs or principles, especially one on which a political system, party, or organization is based."
The Heritage Foundation was "founded on February 16, 1973, by Paul Weyrich, Edwin Feulner, and Joseph Coors. Growing out of the new business activist movement inspired by the Powell Memorandum, discontent with Richard Nixon's embrace of the "liberal consensus" and the nonpolemical, cautious nature of existing think tanks"
The Heritiage Foundation is not an objective source and was, in fact, founded as a deliberately subjective response out of frustration with non-polemical DC think tanks.
Heritage Foundation does not pretend to be a dictionary or to provide objective defintions of words. No worthy debater would rely on your custom-built definiton of IDEOLOGY.
Neuroscientist TRIGGERS trans activists with basic FACTS - she isn’t afraid to speak the truth, and discloses the reality that current science on this subject is woke and very few are willing to speak out against it, let alone do research that contradicts the narrative. The look on the faces of some of the trans and trans activities in the audience and panel when slapped with reality is remarkable.
-->
@oromagi
You’re not using the correct definition of ideology, yet again.When defining words, good debaters strive to use dictionaries with a reputation for objectivity. Bad debaters start with the definiton they want and look until they find a definition that reinforces their bias.
That defines YOU to the proverbial “T”!
The Cambridge Dictionary defines IDEOLOGY [noun] as "a set of beliefs or principles, especially one on which a political system, party, or organization is based."
STILL the WRONG definition!!!! Individuals and/or the movement of the alphabet soup are not a “political system,” “party,” or “organization.”
This is the correct definition within the correct and factual LINGUISTICAL CONTEXT of the topic of this discussion:
variants or less commonly idealogy
ˌī-dē-ˈä-lə-jē ˌī-dē-ˈa- ˌi-dē-ˈä- ˌi-dē-ˈa-
plural ideologies
Synonyms of ideology
1
a
: a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture
b
: the integrated assertions, theories and aims that constitute a sociopolitical program
c
: a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture
The Heritage Foundation was "founded on February 16, 1973, by Paul Weyrich, Edwin Feulner, and Joseph Coors. Growing out of the new business activist movement inspired by the Powell Memorandum, discontent with Richard Nixon's embrace of the "liberal consensus" and the nonpolemical, cautious nature of existing think tanks"
Implicit genetic fallacy.
The Heritiage Foundation is not an objective source and was, in fact, founded as a deliberately subjective response out of frustration with non-polemical DC think tanks.
Implicit genetic fallacy.
Heritage Foundation does not pretend to be a dictionary or to provide objective defintions of words. No worthy debater would rely on your custom-built definiton of IDEOLOGY.
You’re the only one creating a fallacious custom built definition to fit your BS biased nuanced view.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
I believe that the LGBT community and ideology is not healthy for society
You might as well be saying 'the blue-eyed community and ideology is not healthy for society'. Just because something runs contrary to your ideology doesn't mean it is a competing ideology or detrimental to society.
An ideology that goes against science,
LGBTQ isnt against science anymore than heterosexuality is.
-->
@TWS1405_2
MIrriam-Webster's definiton gets you no closer to making LGBTQ an ideology While it is true that the LGBTQ community may have a shared set of experiences and perspectives that are influenced by their sexual orientation or gender identity, this does not qualify as an ideology in the sense of a set of beliefs or principles that govern the actions and goals of a group or society.
You are irrationally stereotyping LGBTQ thought as identical, fallaciously claiming without evidence that LGBTQ share a characteristic manner or content of thinking. There is no systematic body of concepts held in common by LGBTQ people.
-->
@oromagi
MIrriam-Webster's definiton gets you no closer to making LGBTQ an ideology
A bag of marbles has far more intelligence than you.
And you’re as lazy as Double_R not reviewing any cited sources discrediting your subjective nonsense.
"We dont have an ideology"
Except when you go around telling people that LGBT is not wrong.
-->
@oromagi
While it is true that the LGBTQ community may have a shared set of experiences and perspectives that are influenced by their sexual orientation or gender identity, this does not qualify as an ideology in the sense of a set of beliefs or principles that govern the actions and goals of a group or society.
Shifting the goal posts, ignoring the factual definition…typical intellectual coward denialist move.
What part of the MW definition that clearly demarcated “group” did you fail to understand.
It is not about society, at all, so that notion is out the window.
You jsut cannot stand being proven wrong.
Such a loser.
-->
@TWS1405_2
-->@oromagiWhy are you here at DART? Seriously. Why!It’s clear you’re neither interested in legit debates/discussions, nor are you equipped to do so.
Why are you qualified to question his existence on a site where free expression ought to be encouraged, or anyone at all?
-->
@Intelligence_06
Why are you qualified to question his existence on a site where free expression ought to be encouraged, or anyone at all?
And who in the hell do YOU think you are questioning why I am asking a perfectly legit question!!!?!!!!
Everyone has motives, interests, purpose, agenda, so on and so forth that involve a multitude of various things.
It’s no different if I asked you why you chose Arby’s instead of Jack in the Box.
Why someone is here at DART vs another debate website is a legit question. Especially given the observed behavior, attitude, demeanor and overall conduct that has been observed of them.
Now kindly f**k off, and keep f’g off.
-->
@Intelligence_06
Why are you qualified to question his existence on a site where free expression ought to be encouraged, or anyone at all?
- That is the white supremacist's signature move- when you can't compete, de-legitimize.
-->
@TWS1405_2
Minus the slightly questionable attitude, you are actually correct. Thank you.
-->
@oromagi
Why are you qualified to question his existence on a site where free expression ought to be encouraged, or anyone at all?
- That is the white supremacist's signature move- when you can't compete, de-legitimize.
It’s a question of presence, not existence.
And each time you falsely accuse me of white supremacy you demonstrate your intellectual liberal
Cowardice to the letter.
-->
@Intelligence_06
No, it is not correct. Neither are you. Pair of losers.
-->
@TWS1405_2
Oh, so you are saying that you are not correct.
What do you believe, then?