|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics, Religion & other Controversies » Objectivism & the Republican Party?

Default Objectivism & the Republican Party?

August 22nd, 2012, 21:22
That's just flat out wrong, Thrasher. Read the thread.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Still afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#61

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,360

Default 

August 22nd, 2012, 21:49
I have read it multiple times DTE, have you? You are imagining attacks where they don't exist. Quote me an attack on your children, otherwise they don't exist.
Thrasher is offline

Thrasher

Thrasher's Avatar
Wheeee!
RPGWatch Donor

#62

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 10,329

Default 

August 22nd, 2012, 22:53
I have some knowledge of you based on your post history and you're here to defend yourself. Plus, you've volunteered to participate in this conversation so you've implicitly accepted a certain level of "abuse". Thus, the first sentence, while rather rude, would come from informed opinion and could be refuted directly by the person "insulted", who has voluntarily put themselves in the public sphere. (for the record, I don't think you're an asshole)
First of all, if anything is to have an impact on me - it's going to have to be based on truth or rational thought.

If you were to call my imaginary wife a whore, and you had nothing substantial to base it on - it wouldn't have the slightest impact on me. Well, except that I knew you were being a worthless person to have an exchange with.

Naturally, if you said it out loud and she was present, it'd have an impact, because she would likely be hurt and I wouldn't appreciate that.

I don't know your wife (actually, I don't even know if you have one, which amplifies the point). I know absolutely nothing about her. Thus, the second sentence cannot possibly come from informed opinion is and therefore a blind attack. Additionally, your wife has not volunteered to participate in this conversation. She's not available to defend herself, and she has not volunteered to place herself in the public sphere.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this about something Ubereil has inferred from YOUR behavior and how YOUR behavior might affect your children?

Your children aren't magically inhuman and unaffected to set them apart from all other children in the world. Your ability as a parent isn't THAT good, DTE.

Also, are you saying, with a straight face, that you only ever talk about people who're willingly a part of whatever debate? Talk about bullshitting yourself. How many politicians have you insulted that you've never met or that you have almost no actual knowledge of - except what you hear in the media?

If you can't see the difference between the two, and why a different reaction is justified, I don't know what to tell you.
I can easily see the difference and I can easily understand the reaction. It's called an overreaction based on a very emotional and irrational position that's not helping you appear like a smart person.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#63

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 15,258

Default 

August 23rd, 2012, 02:17
We're getting WAY off topic here gents. If you wish to debate parenting, please open a new thread where your vast experience can be made manifest!!

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#64

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,615
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin

Default 

August 23rd, 2012, 15:04
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Also, are you saying, with a straight face, that you only ever talk about people who're willingly a part of whatever debate? Talk about bullshitting yourself. How many politicians have you insulted that you've never met or that you have almost no actual knowledge of - except what you hear in the media?
Because politicians certainly didn't volunteer to be in the public sphere… That's sarcasm, just in case you missed it.

This is clearly pointless. You get your wish, Corwin.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Still afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#65

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,360

Default 

August 23rd, 2012, 15:17
Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
Because politicians certainly didn't volunteer to be in the public sphere… That's sarcasm, just in case you missed it.
They didn't willfully commit to being insulted by strangers on a public website - and they have no way to defend themselves. I understand that you think that's "less unfair" when people become "public" - but I don't agree.

But I could have mentioned any kind of stranger you know nothing about, like when you making sweeping judgments about people who work in the same building as you, or when you make judgments about a friend of a friend that you heard did this or that.

We all do this to some extent, and you're certainly not one to hold back claims about strangers. I don't think we need to do much digging for that.

Bottom line is that your children weren't affected negatively in any way whatsoever. Beyond that, Ubereil most certainly didn't intend for them to get affected in any way whatsoever.

YOU were affected because you irrationally felt your children were "attacked" - and that's YOUR mistake.

Now, whether or not Ubereil had a point - I can't say. I won't claim what he did was right or respectful - because it most likely wasn't.

But your reaction was over the top, and that's all there is to it. I bet you know this, you just won't acknowledge it.

Oh, and for the record, I don't think you're a bad parent. I think you're just as loving as the average parent is. I also think you're selling yourself short with your reactionary caveman like presentation of yourself here - and I know with absolute certainty that you're not REALLY limited to that image. But you must understand that most people won't pick up on that - and they will respond to you based on what information you give them.

It's most likely a remnant of the old-fashioned "male ideal" that you find impossible to shred without losing something. I could be wrong, but that's how I read you.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#66

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 15,258

Default 

August 23rd, 2012, 20:53
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
They didn't willfully commit to being insulted by strangers on a public website - and they have no way to defend themselves. I understand that you think that's "less unfair" when people become "public" - but I don't agree.

But I could have mentioned any kind of stranger you know nothing about, like when you making sweeping judgments about people who work in the same building as you, or when you make judgments about a friend of a friend that you heard did this or that.

We all do this to some extent, and you're certainly not one to hold back claims about strangers. I don't think we need to do much digging for that.

Bottom line is that your children weren't affected negatively in any way whatsoever. Beyond that, Ubereil most certainly didn't intend for them to get affected in any way whatsoever.

YOU were affected because you irrationally felt your children were "attacked" - and that's YOUR mistake.

Now, whether or not Ubereil had a point - I can't say. I won't claim what he did was right or respectful - because it most likely wasn't.

But your reaction was over the top, and that's all there is to it. I bet you know this, you just won't acknowledge it.

Oh, and for the record, I don't think you're a bad parent. I think you're just as loving as the average parent is. I also think you're selling yourself short with your reactionary caveman like presentation of yourself here - and I know with absolute certainty that you're not REALLY limited to that image. But you must understand that most people won't pick up on that - and they will respond to you based on what information you give them.

It's most likely a remnant of the old-fashioned "male ideal" that you find impossible to shred without losing something. I could be wrong, but that's how I read you.
So politicians don't deserve to be insulted by strangers on an internet forum because they can't defend themselves but it would be ok to insult DTEs children because they wouldn't be harmed by it?
Exactly how much do you think that insults on the internet affect your average politician? Probably about as much as insulting DTEs children will affect them. Actually, probably less.
And yes, politicians made a choice to publicly state their view knowing that not everyone agrees with them, knowing that some of those people will be vocal about it, and knowing that some of them will be assholes. If they couldn't foresee that someone would talk shit about them somewhere then they are probably to stupid to be in politics in the first place.
You don't see anything wrong with your reasoning here?

(I'm not taking any sides on that other thread, don't want to stick my head in to that can of worms.)

conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evil, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.

rational, adj. Devoid of all delusions save those of observation, experience and reflection.
-Ambrose Bierce, The Devils Dictionary
peko is offline

peko

Watchdog

#67

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 117

Default 

August 23rd, 2012, 21:08
Originally Posted by peko View Post
So politicians don't deserve to be insulted by strangers on an internet forum because they can't defend themselves but it would be ok to insult DTEs children because they wouldn't be harmed by it?
Exactly how much do you think that insults on the internet affect your average politician? Probably about as much as insulting DTEs children will affect them. Actually, probably less.
And yes, politicians made a choice to publicly state their view knowing that not everyone agrees with them, knowing that some of those people will be vocal about it, and knowing that some of them will be assholes. If they couldn't foresee that someone would talk shit about them somewhere then they are probably to stupid to be in politics in the first place.
You don't see anything wrong with your reasoning here?

(I'm not taking any sides on that other thread, don't want to stick my head in to that can of worms.)
Could you point out where I'm saying it's ok to insult his children?
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#68

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 15,258

Default 

August 23rd, 2012, 22:13
There seems to be a distinct deficit of communication on this thread, probably because people are too frothy to actually read what people write.
Thrasher is offline

Thrasher

Thrasher's Avatar
Wheeee!
RPGWatch Donor

#69

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 10,329

Default 

August 24th, 2012, 00:29
I asked you nicely to stay ON TOPIC. Since you didn't, I'll close this thread. Then, you may begin a NEW one on the actual topic!!

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#70

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,615
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics, Religion & other Controversies » Objectivism & the Republican Party?
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:14.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch