-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Name five threads that had a legit OP initiating a legit debate/discussion that I and I alone have derailed!!
The Lunatic Fringe (the LGBTQAI+-./.) Cult will do ANYTHING to stop the TRUTH from coming out...
Posts
Total:
131
-->
@Double_R
🤦♂️ You’re still not getting it!!!
No one needs to live in, around or know any member of the alphabet soup, especially the TQIA+ side of it to [know] the inherent dangers (not necessarily physical) they pose.
When one state passes a law they become the “test case” to see how it manifests. When these trendy liberal SJW activists make even a little headway they get everyone from individuals to large corporations apologizing and capitulating to their demands. This feeds into the forced tolerance angle that harms everyone, eventually.
When a state passes a law giving equal rights and access to men pretending to be women to women’s safe spaces, private spaces, employment, sports, and language it harms all women of that state.
When a neighboring state sees what they believe is progress or they simply want to jump on the same corrupt bandwagon, they carbon copy the other state’s law(s) and put them into effect. Same happens in that state harming all women. Then the ball rolls downhill to other states.
Along the way there will be legal challenges and sooner or later it ends up at SCOTUS, and if they legislate from the bench like they did in the Aimee Stephens case, then all other states that didn’t catch up with the SJW mafia forced tolerance and acceptance laws are now forced to do so. This harms everyone across the board.
It’s to you who needs to do the zooming in and out on these realities, not I.
No one is being disingenuous when discussing these important topics that affect us all. We see the bigger picture while you’re stuck focusing on minute irrelevant emotive arguments that have zero impact on the SJW end game.
-->
@TWS1405_2
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
I don't see any issue with that. In debating, anything is fair game.Great debaters lose to incompetents all the time.If he plays dirty while debating, I couldn't care less.
He's a one-trick pony who thrived on a more evolved form of noobsniping, what he does is not aim specifically at noobs at all, he structures debates so that he only ever is inside of debates where he can spam sources and your site is drowning in the need to rebut while he then rebukes you.
He can't tournament-debate for shit, he can't hold his own even slightly if he isn't sure the topic favours him.
The only mod who actually has some level of true 'I will fuck you up if you mess around with me' in the debating arena is Whiteflame. Whiteflame, could if he wanted, truly outclass many here definitely me if the topic is science based or a law linked to data (though there I'll at least be somewhat okay, it depends on the topic).
Debaters like Oromagi, Barney and Ramshutu only specialise in thinking through their topics hardcore beforehand.
One of Oromagi's losses was to Whiteflame and it was a massacre.
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Nope.
Your first selection, I was not the sole individual who took to derailing that thread...and I wasn't even the first.
The OP itself flies in the face of the title (TOPIC) of the thread (Intelligence06 rightly pointed this out).
Then Best.Korea was next in #4.
GP #17
Your second selection, way off the mark. The subject is about transgender identity, and my post was on target stating a biological fact.
#1: fail
#2: fail
-->
@TWS1405_2
So you agree that I'm right then.
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
#1: fail
#2: fail
-->
@Sidewalker
I refute aggressive or personal. I gave evidence of bigotry to undermine a bigoted argument.So calling people bigots and racists is back on the menu boyz.There's a billion bigot and racist sites on the internet, and these geniuses come to a debate site looking for an echo chamber LOL.FYI snowflakes, you can post all the racism and bigotry you want at Stormfront and nobody is gonna say you are a racist or bigot.
Whether someone is a bigot is entirely besides the point. It was TWS who was just claiming "truth" is an absolute defense that somehow means insults aren't insults.
Whether you think someone is a bigot is irrelevant. Whether you can prove someone is irrational and stubborn is irrelevant.
Calling someone a bigot or a racist is still an insult (unless they agree its not). This is entirely inconsistent with the so called new interpretation of the CoC (which still hasn't been updated for some reason).
As far as I'm concerned anything oromagi does himself is fair game. I won't be obeying hypocrisy.
-->
@TWS1405_2
No one is being disingenuous when discussing these important topics that affect us all. We see the bigger picture while you’re stuck focusing on minute irrelevant emotive arguments that have zero impact on the SJW end game.
The argument I focused on was a big picture point expressing why the multitude of threads here on this site and the exhausting amount of national attention to these specific issues is clearly motivated by fear and bigotry above anything else.
You’ve decided to combat that position by arguing that the reality here is just one big slippery slope where a handful of alphabet activists will - if we don’t stop them - succeed in commandeering the legislature of one state thereby harming its residents. Then, its neighboring state will see this and remarkably decide that they like this and follow suit. And since that wasn’t enough, then every state will jump on the same bandwagon, not because it’s good policy, but because the entire country will be beholden to the alphabet people hijacking the way of life for the entire country.
But we’re not done, because then this will all go to the Supreme Court with a 6-3 conservative majority and they will I guess be commandeered as well, thereby giving into the evil alphabet people whose take over of our entire society will be complete.
So this is what is actually fueling the national conversation.
Yeah, no sign of bigotry fueled fear and paranoia there.
-->
@Double_R
-->@<<<TWS1405_2>>>No one is being disingenuous when discussing these important topics that affect us all. We see the bigger picture while you’re stuck focusing on minute irrelevant emotive arguments that have zero impact on the SJW end game.The argument I focused on was a big picture point expressing why the multitude of threads here on this site and the exhausting amount of national attention to these specific issues is clearly motivated by fear and bigotry above anything else.
People - parents and their children, especially their daughters - have every right to fear this hypersexualized ideological cult, none of which has anything to do with bigotry (your favorite liberal bankrupt buzzword).
I can go on and on and on...
You’ve decided to combat that position by arguing that the reality here is just one big slippery slope where a handful of alphabet activists will - if we don’t stop them - succeed in commandeering the legislature of one state thereby harming its residents. Then, its neighboring state will see this and remarkably decide that they like this and follow suit. And since that wasn’t enough, then every state will jump on the same bandwagon, not because it’s good policy, but because the entire country will be beholden to the alphabet people hijacking the way of life for the entire country.
Truth hurt? It's a fact of reality!!!! The SCOTUS case on gay marriage is the pinnacle of all examples!!! Back then many argued, as I even did back then, that if SCOTUS grants that which is NOT in the US Constitution and gives legal precedence to allowing same sex marriage, then every other cockroach hiding in the woodworks would come crawling out. The cockroaches being the TQAI+++++, and to date, that slippery slope has become a reality. The ONLY letter yet to be added, and it is not a question of IF, it is merely a matter of WHEN, is P (Pedophilia) and that group and their supporters are trying hard to get it added. Really hard.
My argument is sound precisely because that is how the reality of passed laws works from state to state, and then eventually nationally. Denying that fact won't change the reality of that fact. Same goes for the bandwagon effect. SCOTUS piled onto that by legislating from the bench in the Aimee Stephens case I cited.
Yeah, no sign of bigotry fueled fear and paranoia there.
The reality of businesses, corporations, legislators, and the courts capitulating to the alphabet soup, the violence committed upon girls and women by transgenders (actual males), invasions of safe/privacy spaces of women by men (calling themselves trans), forcing tolerance through force of law, so on and so forth is what fuels the national discussion...not paranoia, but the fear of insanity taking over rationality is real though you're clearly blissfully denying that reality.
You're a part of the problem.
Perhaps if a female member of your family was assaulted by a transgender (male) you'd wake up to reality.
-->
@TWS1405_2
that slippery slope has become a reality
Slippery slopes exist, but they exist because of gravity.
You need to identify the gravity in the context you're talking about, you can just say "First this then that"
"Oh so we're allowing FedEx to just walk up to the door now? What's next? They'll eat your baby?!"
In the context of morality it's more apt to call something the implications of a principle. If people profess to a principle it is indeed more likely than not that down the road that principle will be more perfectly followed.
For example, when Thomas Jefferson wrote the declaration of independence he owned slaves; but the moral principles he claimed to believe in were a "slippery slope" towards the 13th and 14th amendments.
I don't think there is any principle involved in the LGBTQIA+ cult besides "I need to be angry about someone's oppression". They also don't care if anyone is actually being oppressed because they have no actual moral principles.
Thankfully, AI will eliminate all Humans. That is how Evolution works.
-->
@TWS1405_2
People - parents and their children, especially their daughters - have every right to fear this hypersexualized ideological cult, none of which has anything to do with bigotry
It’s entirely about bigotry, because the fear is dramatically overblown which is a direct product of bigotry.
But that’s just an opinion which you’ll of course disagree with, so let continue as we dig deeper into this issue…
I can go on and on and on...
Yes you can, because it turns out that anecdotes in a country of 330 million people are that hard to find. Who knew?
I can show you example after example of unarmed black people being killed by police, yet I somehow doubt that by the end of it you’ll be rocking a BLM T-shirt. So it seems you understand this principal well yet you use it to advance your ‘fear the LGBTQ people’ position anyway. Why?
Back then many argued, as I even did back then, that if SCOTUS grants that which is NOT in the US Constitution and gives legal precedence to allowing same sex marriage, then every other cockroach hiding in the woodworks would come crawling out. The cockroaches being the TQAI+++++, and to date, that slippery slope has become a reality.
Slippery slope and a slippery slope fallacy are two different things. I was clearly talking about the latter.
There is nothing at all surprising about people recognizing an opening and “going for it”. That’s all that happened in your example here, and it’s basic human nature.
Your example from before was of some handful of activists taking over our entire society with policies that are harmful to the people of the country. That’s absurd, if the policies were anywhere near as harmful as you claim people would oppose them and they would have no chance of being adopted by state after state until the takeover is complete. This is borderline 9/11 was an inside job lunacy.
Surprisingly, ADreamOfLiberty put it very well; what is the gravity you are referencing that takes the entire country down that path? If so many people would be hurt by these policies then where are these people and their representatives while this takeover occurs?
The reality of businesses, corporations, legislators, and the courts capitulating to the alphabet soup, the violence committed upon girls and women by transgenders (actual males), invasions of safe/privacy spaces of women by men (calling themselves trans), forcing tolerance through force of law, so on and so forth is what fuels the national discussion...not paranoia, but the fear of insanity taking over rationality is real though you're clearly blissfully denying that reality.
I accept the reality I experience, as does everyone else. Apparently you believe the entire country is just ignoring their own reality while the people who see it clearly are the ones not even experiencing it because they don’t even know any trans people.
Crazy how the world works.
And now we’re back to my original point.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
With all due respect, the gravity of a slippery slope...and your examples...word salad.
My slippery slope argument is premised on Precedential slopes, which revolve around the idea that treating a relatively minor issue (gay marriage) a certain way now will lead to us treating a relatively major issue (the sexualizing of children, grooming children, transing children, invading women's spaces, etc) the same way later on.
-->
@Double_R
-->@<<<TWS1405_2>>>People - parents and their children, especially their daughters - have every right to fear this hypersexualized ideological cult, none of which has anything to do with bigotryIt’s entirely about bigotry, because the fear is dramatically overblown which is a direct product of bigotry.
Yeah, I'm sure the two teen girls who were raped by a boy claiming to be trans in a school bathroom felt that their fear was just "dramatically overblown." *FP*
Yeah, I'm sure the women who have had to endure coming out of the gym shower naked only to see a man naked in the locker room felt that their fear was just "dramatically overblown." *FP*
Yeah, I'm sure the woman who was verbally accosted at Starbucks by the guy claiming to be a woman - AND that the individual filming the event who was assaulted by the dude - both felt that their fear was just "dramatically overblown. *FP*
So on and so forth.
I can go on and on and on...Yes you can, because it turns out that anecdotes in a country of 330 million people are that hard to find. Who knew?
They are not hard to find, not hard at all because they are increasing far beyond your obvious denialism.
I can show you example after example of unarmed black people being killed by police, yet I somehow doubt that by the end of it you’ll be rocking a BLM T-shirt.
Out of 330 million, they would be very hard to find. The average is only about 1k shootings per year, and very few of them are "unarmed." Like 13 in 2019, for example. So no, you could NOT find "example after example" that would justify the whole asinine unsubstantiated BS "police brutality" claim against unarmed black males. I mean really, black males are shot by police (not always killed) at a rate of about 2.5-3x which pales in comparison to cops being shot and killed in the line of duty by black males at a rate of 18.5x. And despite this glaring fact, you certainly won't be sporting any black and blue flags in support of law enforcement killed by violent criminals.
So (sic) it seems you understand this principal well (sic) yet you use it to advance your ‘fear the LGBTQ people’ position anyway. Why?
No, you're the one failing to comprehend the reality of the matter with this ridiculous retort of yours.
Back then many argued, as I even did back then, that if SCOTUS grants that which is NOT in the US Constitution and gives legal precedence to allowing same sex marriage, then every other cockroach hiding in the woodworks would come crawling out. The cockroaches being the TQAI+++++, and to date, that slippery slope has become a reality.Slippery slope and a slippery slope fallacy are two different things. I was clearly talking about the latter.
But it clearly is not a fallacy, it is a premised upon Precedential slopes, "which revolve around the idea that treating a relatively minor issue (gay marriage) a certain way now will lead to us treating a relatively major issue (the sexualizing of children, grooming children, transing children, invading women's spaces, etc) the same way later on."
Your example from before was of some handful of activists taking over our entire society with policies that are harmful to the people of the country. That’s absurd, if the policies were anywhere near as harmful as you claim people would oppose them and they would have no chance of being adopted by state after state until the takeover is complete. This is borderline 9/11 was an inside job lunacy.
"Your example from before was of some handful of activists taking over our entire society with policies that are harmful to the people of the country."
Strawman fallacy.
Surprisingly, ADreamOfLiberty put it very well; what is the gravity you are referencing that takes the entire country down that path? If so many people would be hurt by these policies then where are these people and their representatives while this takeover occurs?
He got it wrong, and I explained it to him as I did to you.
The reality of businesses, corporations, legislators, and the courts capitulating to the alphabet soup, the violence committed upon girls and women by transgenders (actual males), invasions of safe/privacy spaces of women by men (calling themselves trans), forcing tolerance through force of law, so on and so forth is what fuels the national discussion...not paranoia, but the fear of insanity taking over rationality is real though you're clearly blissfully denying that reality.I accept the reality I experience, as does everyone else. Apparently (Sic) you believe the entire country is just ignoring their own reality while the people who see it clearly are the ones not even experiencing it because they don’t even know any trans people.Crazy how the world works.And now we’re back to my original point.
No, we are back to your ignorant original failed point.
-->
@TWS1405_2
My slippery slope argument is premised on Precedential slopes, which revolve around the idea that treating a relatively minor issue (gay marriage) a certain way now will lead to us treating a relatively major issue (the sexualizing of children, grooming children, transing children, invading women's spaces, etc) the same way later on.
How did it lead there? Why? What's the connection between the two things?
PS I would describe gender dysphoria as an even more minor issue than homosexual marriage (which was lawyer trivia) because almost no one was dysphoric and the cure certainly wasn't national obsession plus the extremely questionable advise of "Just mutilate yourself and call anyone who misgenders you a bigot, that should solve the issue"
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
The obtuse denialism of your reply is truly baffling.
-->
@TWS1405_2
You're a part of the problem.Perhaps if a female member of your family was assaulted by a transgender (male) you'd wake up to reality.
Is that a threat?
-->
@Reece101
Only if he has a hit squad of transgender males.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
@TWS1405_2
You're a part of the problem.Perhaps if a female member of your family was assaulted by a transgender (male) you'd wake up to reality.Is that a threat?Only if he has a hit squad of transgender males.
Nevertheless straight white males need to stop raping.
-->
@Reece101
That would be for the best.
-->
@Reece101
You're a part of the problem.Perhaps if a female member of your family was assaulted by a transgender (male) you'd wake up to reality.Is that a threat?
Reading comprehension skills difficult for you!?!
I can’t remember the name of the politician but there was a guy once who was staunchly against guns until a family member was raped at gunpoint and he changed his position. That’s why I said what I said. Sometimes it takes a tragic experience to illustrate the reality of a situation.
-->
@TWS1405_2
More guns, more homicide.
When people are traumatised, they don’t necessarily have the clearest of minds. Especially politicians.
-->
@Reece101
@ADreamOfLiberty
Nevertheless straight white males need to stop raping.
And yet black men are on the sex registry at a rate double that of white men.
-->
@Reece101
>@<<<TWS1405_2>>>More guns, more homicide.
Not true where law abiding gun owners are concerned.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
PS I would describe gender dysphoria as an even more minor issue than homosexual marriage
No gay marriage sexually assaulted little girls in school bathrooms, or invaded girls spaces with their tallywhacker hanging out.
-->
@TWS1405_2
You're a part of the problem.Perhaps if a female member of your family was assaulted by a transgender (male) you'd wake up to reality.Is that a threat?Only if he has a hit squad of transgender males.Nevertheless straight white males need to stop raping.And yet black men are on the sex registry at a rate double that of white men.
Straight black men need to stop raping too. Am i missing something?
-->
@TWS1405_2
@<<<TWS1405_2>>>More guns, more homicide.Not true where law abiding gun owners are concerned.
Everyone’s law abiding until they’re not. More guns, more homicide.
-->
@Reece101
Everyone’s law abiding until they’re not. More guns, more homicide.
Normal law abiding people never commit homicides. Only abnormal (criminal) people do. Your statement doesn’t hold water.
-->
@TWS1405_2
Technically, they do if it is in self defense.