- 2,858
- Australia
Political Correctness
- Thread starter lbsf1
- 2,919 comments
- 170,470 views
Danoff
Premium
- 33,968
- Mile High City
Why do we care?
You might as well have a discussion about why some people look for certain traits in a mate. What difference does it make? "I'm not giving birth to a gay baby" is the same as saying "I'm not having a baby with anyone under 6 feet tall". Whether an embryo is in development or not is immaterial.
- 2,858
- Australia
Because a whole lot of people, maybe even most, don't realise how much they float about, making decisions that are all over the place, principle-wise - and how many conflicting or illogical views they hold. Worse, they end up casting judgement on others for things they effectively do themselves. I'm sure I'm guilty of it, but hopefully less so than most.
Some people are going to need to arrive at logic by degrees, and it's not just the logic of abortion in play here. For one, it's also the logic that by default gay people offer nothing non-arbitrarily different to society, and that there is no reason to mandate their continued existence, that intersected.
Oh, and if we did run with your comparison...... Wouldn't you feel a little ridiculous jumping in to a conversation about why people decide on certain mates, blurting out authoritatively "People have the right to choose whichever mate they want!!"?
Last edited:
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
--
Displaying a cross on public grounds is quite possibly a violation of the Establishment Clause of 1A. Might want to take that into consideration before deciding which side is "slapping" it "in the mouth."
--
Mine is that they are narrow bodies of water.
No.
Exercising free speech in response to free speech is a problem?
Wut?
But thanks to the labels and stupidity spewed by the PC crowd, I am homophobic.
"Don't label me, people whom I just labeled!"
Okay, this time I'll skip the water joke and ask seriously: who has a problem understanding straightness?
Citation(s) needed.
DLR_Mysterion
(Banned)
- 365
- United Kingdom
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
How so? The heterosexuality of straight white cis males isn't what groups like that are upset about.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Not sure what this means but I'm pretty happy to have my own labels now. A few days ago I got told on the boards here that I had "white privilege" but I'm also a white cis male too. I probably have a couple of other labels too but I'm never sure what applies to me when I read stuff on the internet. Kind of feels inclusive, like I'm one of the crowd now
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
The only reason I posted about the tree is cause of the PC crowd in a tis every time any god but there own is mentioned, or cause they don't have one. The PC crowd is nothing but a group of people who have nothing better to do with there time, than complain about something offending them that they could have ignored.
Seriously what's next? Banning the dang tree cause it's viewed by someone as being religiously offensive?
We already have HOA's telling residents it's offensive to some fellow residents, to fly the American flag.
I'm not going to debate over something I might have gotten wrong. That said, the council didn't even try to fight the removal, they couldn't afford it(in my link) and in the same document you mention @huskeR32, they(council) might have possibly won. But they couldn't afford to fight it and the case probably wouldn't have even been heard by Christmas anyways. They shouldn't have bowed down so easily IMO, anyways.
Yeah, in this case, it is on government land and a cross. So what? Screw these stupid new laws. If you are offended by a cross, you have some other issues.
Seriously what's next? Banning the dang tree cause it's viewed by someone as being religiously offensive?
We already have HOA's telling residents it's offensive to some fellow residents, to fly the American flag.
I'm not going to debate over something I might have gotten wrong. That said, the council didn't even try to fight the removal, they couldn't afford it(in my link) and in the same document you mention @huskeR32, they(council) might have possibly won. But they couldn't afford to fight it and the case probably wouldn't have even been heard by Christmas anyways. They shouldn't have bowed down so easily IMO, anyways.
Yeah, in this case, it is on government land and a cross. So what? Screw these stupid new laws. If you are offended by a cross, you have some other issues.
LGBTQ call themselves, whichever letter/group the are or claim to be. Someone places the homophobic label on someone, when voicing a opinion they don't like, just cause they disagree/dislike the subject. I don't know exactly what anyone is till they tell me and I don't even care anymore after numerous debates. That said, don't try to ask me to swing that way.
You so funny! I always get that wrong... Cause English. Glad my illiteracy continues to entertain.
I don't think so. For every action there is a reaction. There has to be a group out there that is against heterosexuality. And guess what! Heterophobi(c/a) is even in the dictionary. Google it... You'll be amazed.
- 11,119
- Central Coast, NSW
- Com_Fox5
- EelX 5
- 2,858
- Australia
Do you think that "People can abort for any reason" and "People can choose whichever mate they want" are somehow not equivalent to each other in respect to the comparison that you chose?
You wouldn't feel a little ridiculous...... Ok.
Then I'd be inclined to think that you've become so accustomed to "logic bombing" that it's become somewhat indiscriminate, and defies an often necessary sense of context. @Imari and I were discussing some finer details of a topic when you stormed in to "save the day" by "totally nailing it" with a sweeping umbrella statement. One which I know I already agreed with, and strongly suspect @Imari also did. I don't know if it's elitism, a lack of tact, lazy analyses of people, or something else, but it comes across as condescending.
Last edited:
- 13,852
- Adelaide
- Neomone
The only reason I posted about the tree is cause of the PC crowd in a tis every time any god but there own is mentioned, or cause they don't have one. The PC crowd is nothing but a group of people who have nothing better to do with there time, than complain about something offending them that they could have ignored.
Seriously what's next? Banning the dang tree cause it's viewed by someone as being religiously offensive?
We already have HOA's telling residents it's offensive to some fellow residents, to fly the American flag.
I'm not going to debate over something I might have gotten wrong. That said, the council didn't even try to fight the removal, they couldn't afford it(in my link) and in the same document you mention @huskeR32, they(council) might have possibly won. But they couldn't afford to fight it and the case probably wouldn't have even been heard by Christmas anyways. They shouldn't have bowed down so easily IMO, anyways.
Yeah, in this case, it is on government land and a cross. So what? Screw these stupid new laws. If you are offended by a cross, you have some other issues.
Or one could say that if you're so defined by what an external body chooses to do with their own decorations, an external body who is supposed to represent ALL their constituents and not just the Christian ones, then perhaps you have some issues yourself.
Put up your own tree. Do what you like with it. Don't get mad because everyone else isn't just like you.
Google it... You'll be amazed.
I'm amazed that you'd use that argument when the top four links are urban dictionary, urban dictionary, tumblr, and rationalwiki.
DLR_Mysterion
(Banned)
- 365
- United Kingdom
Huh? I got https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heterophobia
It's a component, as stated by the inclusion of "cis". Basically you could have anti-white members, anti-straight members or members who hate all 3 parts. If you really want citation I guess you can look at the recent change in the BAFTA criteria for 2 of their most prestigious awards.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ty-requirements-might-have-barred-james-bond/
You now have to show you're actively contributing to less discrimination to be considered the best film. Crazy world huh?
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
Nonsense. Context (here: government property being used to promote one particular religion) matters a lot. Find me a story where a private citizen has been forced to take down a Christmas tree on their own personal property, then I'll join you in decrying the violation of their first amendment rights. Your continued inability to see the difference between public and private, and how that relates to the Establishment Clause of 1A, doesn't make this a real issue.
Or they're a group of people who actually want to see the first amendment upheld, and not have other people's religions forced onto them.
Citation very badly needed.
Wait a second. The council chose to take the cross down of their own accord? Nobody forced them? Then what are we even talking about?
For the third or fourth time, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, that's what.
New?
That's not what I was referring to. You decried being labeled homophobic, and in the same sentence labeled the people who called you that the "PC crowd."
Yeah, labels are stupid. But when you're labeling people and decrying labels in the same sentence, there's really nothing else to do other than laugh at the ridiculousness of it.
Swing what way? Who's asking you to do that?
(As an aside, this line, apropos to absolutely nothing that anybody has actually said, might have something to do with people thinking you're a homophobe.)
Shocking.
That's not how reasoned discussion works. If there's such a group, find them and show us.
Things that are also words:
-Bigfoot/Sasquatch
-Yeti
-dragon
-unicorn
-Leprechaun
-Chupacabra
-Krampus
-Atlantis
-Ogre
-Elf
-Cyclops
--
Nope. They're anti- the associated power and privilege. They don't actually care that anybody is straight. They just want all orientations treated the same.
Not giving somebody an award is not the same as hating or persecuting them.
I'd agree it's a bit silly, sure. But again, it's not actually a form of hatred. It's a private organization making their own choices about whom to give a trophy to. Hardly a human rights issue.
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
I did something you or him could have easily done yourselves. I don't control how Yahoo or Google or Bing arrange their results. And I acted just as lazy as him. I could have directly linked Merriam Webster. But it seems y'all have to find something to call me out on to make me look stupid as always... And I finally proved it!
This reminds me of when Famine criticized my definition link, cause the result had the words "simple definition" in it. Do y'all have anything better to do? If you type just the word (HERTEROPHOBIC), that is what you get as the results...
I have to google stuff I read around here a lot, cause guess what? Y'all speak a different kind of English than I do and also use words I've never heard of. I don't ask for a link, I go search for myself to get more opinions than a single link.
I'm not mad. I find the ease of people getting offended funny actually.
Guess what? This Atheist did put up his tree so my family can enjoy the holiday and I have my grandmothers cross she use to wear, on her Urn. I ain't religious and I don't have a problem when I see other peoples religions. My point was how ridiculous it is over how easily they get offended. Two generations ago my great-grandfather would have punched me in the chest and said "toughen up buttercup", if I said I was offended by something this frivolous. Now everyone needs a "safe space". Please
Gladly!
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ation-demands-residents-remove-american-flag/
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/1...ve-u-s-flag-by-hoa-youve-gotta-be-kidding-me/
Google it yourself if you want more.
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
Again:
--
Those stories aren't proof of what you claimed, which was this:
Neither of those residents were told their flags were offensive, just that they violated rules about flags (flags in general, it should be noted, not the American flag specifically). Rules that, as members of the HOA, those residents would have already agreed to by signing a contract.
What we have here is not an example of "PC culture" at all, rather an example of how restrictive and petty some HOA policies are.
Bravo, though, for putting even more spin on the stories than Breitbart and The Blaze managed to. That's quite a feat.
Danoff
Premium
- 33,968
- Mile High City
No, I think that a thread about which mate you choose and a thread about political correctness are somehow not equivalent in the comparison that you chose.
...except that in this case it is precisely on point with the context of the thread and gets right to the heart of the discussion in a clarifying way. The example I gave you earlier, which you've tried to strawman, demonstrates that it is selected based on context.
Now you're making some big inferences.
That's fine. I don't mind being interpreted as condescending.
Edit:
And by the way, insinuating that I'm elitist, tactless, lazy, and condescending doesn't so much add to this amazing discussion so much as it constitutes a personal attack. How about we discuss the substance instead of resorting to mudslinging. I get that you've taken offense for some reason, but name calling is not going to solve the issue.
And keep in mind that the move where you pretend that what you wrote wasn't supposed to call me every single one of those things is not going to help your cause.
Last edited:
mister dog
(Banned)
- 8,396
- Spain
- misterdog
- misterdog7
I saw that and it was related to your opinions on Gran Turismo right?
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
Homosexuality is a word. I guess it doesn't exist right?
http://toprightnews.com/wont-believe-mans-landlord-told-displayed-american-flag-video/
The next link was the one I was originally wanted to post because it was local and all over our news. As usual I was unable to find it. In the link it clearly states some residents find the flag offensive, happy?
http://politichicks.com/2015/04/american-flag-displays-denied-threat-to-muslims-and-foreigners/
We can debate all day of what rights are violated and that it is mainly the HOA's fault.
All you are worried about is the links and not the fact people are being told to remove there American flag on private property on American soil. If that is all you have to debate, good day sir.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
It was so obtuse and out of context I don't even remember what thread it was or who said it. I couldn't stop laughing for minutes on end...for realz.I saw that and it was related to your opinions on Gran Turismo right?
DLR_Mysterion
(Banned)
- 365
- United Kingdom
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
Look who's tree got it's cross back!
http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/12/...own-indiana-christmas-tree-after-lawsuit-aclu
http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/12/...own-indiana-christmas-tree-after-lawsuit-aclu
mister dog
(Banned)
- 8,396
- Spain
- misterdog
- misterdog7
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
That's legally correct though... as much as you or I or any other non-American might feel about it that's what their Constitution promises, a separation of church and state. I'd have no problem with the cross on the tree and I guess you wouldn't either, but that's beside a long-established point of law.
mister dog
(Banned)
- 8,396
- Spain
- misterdog
- misterdog7
Yeah but isn't Christmas a Christian tradition? It's not an event conceived by the state in which case i would understand the point of 'religious neutrality'.
Actually something similar is going on in Madrid right now, traditional 'belen' at the gate is no more and people protest like this:
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
I think the point in this case is that the display is on state land.
