SW:TOR - No Homosexuality

Oxlar · May 6, 2009

Toaster said:
Also, why replace the left-right scale with ANOTHER one-dimensional scale, when combining the two to make a 2D-spectrum actually makes a lot more sense..?

Because the other modern scale hides the truth about America's current two parties. When seen through this more historically accurate scale, one will see that both repubs and dems in this country are taking this country to the left and towards government control and tyranny.

Pladio · May 6, 2009

Oxlar said:
Uh, NO. Any gay person can blend in and live thier lives just fine without going all flaming pro in your face homo pollitical agenda on everyone. When your black and your neighbors are burning crosses and looking for a new 'example' during the next cross burning, you can't simply blend. When the SS went hunting jews in the streets, the jews didn't have the option of not being 'jewish' in appearance. And more importantly, blacks and jews were being killed because of their race, one of which was the government doing the extermination. Your comparing the plight of gay people, not being able to advocate gay lifestyles on a private message board to the extermination of the jews or slavery. Get f'n real.

I'm all for live and let live. But I also don't want this lifestyle being advertised and flaunted to my daughter. If she grows up to be gay, then thats fine. But I prefer man and wife, mother and father, family values to be the influence for my daughter's life. The fed should not get involved. Thats what our federalist system was meant to handle. The local governments are allowed to conform to the desires of its local population, and if you don't like your local policies then move some place that is more in line with your values. Unfortunately, the fed has completely overstepped its power and has taken this away from local governments.

I just read about this again a few hours ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

I think it's really a universal law ...

Ubereil · May 6, 2009

Pladio said:
I just read about this again a few hours ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

I think it's really a universal law ...

It's also a no-brainer. The same thing can be said about anything. Mentioning Radiohead? The more posts, the more likely it becomes. With an infinitive amount of posts the probability of someone mentioning Radiohead is 1.

Übereil

Pladio · May 6, 2009

Oxlar said:
Its funny how those who are pro gay agenda preach tolerance, yet they cannot tolerate any veiwpoint other than their own. My education, experiences, and morality determine my disposition towards homosexuality. I have said nothing derogatory about homosexuality. This reminds me of this whole perez hilton and miss cali fiasco. Its unfortunate how its 'my way' only mentality with you folks. You think its discriminatory to have any other opinion. Well tough. I am in no way discriminating, as I am not condoning any constitutional rights being supressed for homosexuals. And simply having an opinion on such a matter that differs from you is not discrimination in its own right.

If a private company wants to refrain from sexuality being discussed within their medium, they should very well have that freedom to do so. Like someone said in a post above, it doesn't belong in the games. I don't want to escape this world only to go play in a fantasy world where all the pollitical bullcrap is being thrust upon me. Its a friggin game, let it stay that way.

"Kinda sad this person, who faces it, also denies it."

What are you implying?

Yet, you are opposing equal rights for gay couples... Looks a lot like discrimination to me.

Pladio · May 6, 2009

Oxlar said:
Are you on crack? Protecting my daughter brings harm to others??!?!? Your seriously not saying this are you? Now that is ignorant. You can say I 'imply' whatever you want. The truth is that I say what I say. And I never said that I want to restrict the rights of gays, as a matter of fact I've said just the opposite.

That's not true, you said, you don't think gays should have the right to adopt.

Prime Junta · May 6, 2009

Oxlar said:
Because the other modern scale hides the truth about America's current two parties. When seen through this more historically accurate scale, one will see that both repubs and dems in this country are taking this country to the left and towards government control and tyranny.

You might find this table interesting -- it's data on individual liberty around the world:

[ http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=414&year=2008 ]

If you'll dig into the data, you'll find that the only countries that managed the maximum score in all categories are Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and Finland (plus a few statelets like Luxemburg, Liechtenstein, and San Marino). The United States is near the middle of the pack of representative democracies; just a hair freer than Poland, but not quite as free as the Czech Republic.

If you're not careful, who knows what kind of leftist tyranny you might end up in.

Rithrandil · May 6, 2009

I also just want to throw this up there, too, to further explain my point about how Conservative/Constitutional-ist views of how America should work can't be used to support restrictions on homosexual rights, despite what you may think local governments "should" be able to do, Oxlar. You're making the Conservative argument here - small government, government should stay out of our lives, etc - but you're not applying it equally. The government should stay out of *everyone's* private lives - and that means Constituonal rights should apply to heterosexuals and homosexuals equally. How do I know this?

Why, because the founder of American Conservatism, Barry Goldwater, said so!

Barry Goldwater said:
"The big thing is to make this country, along with every other country in the world with a few exceptions, quit discriminating against people just because they're gay," Goldwater asserts. "You don't have to agree with it, but they have a constitutional right to be gay. And that's what brings me into it."

Washington post said:
"The first time this came up was with the question, should there be gays in the military?" Goldwater says. "Having spent 37 years of my life in the military as a reservist, and never having met a gay in all of that time, and never having even talked about it in all those years, I just thought, why the hell shouldn't they serve? They're American citizens. As long as they're not doing things that are harmful to anyone else. ... So I came out for it."

He says he's mystified by the origins of homosexuality. "You try to find out where it started, even going back to old Egyptology – and you knew damn well the Egyptians had to have those people – but you can't find any writings," he says. "I have one grandson who's gay. And my brother {Bob Goldwater} has a granddaughter who is gay. We're sort of at a loss to know what the hell it's all about."

Goldwater says that having openly gay relatives doesn't influence his beliefs, which are animated by libertarian principles that government should stay out of people's private lives.

"He's pretty secure in feeling that discriminating against gays is constitutionally wrong," says Goldwater's gay grandson, Ty Ross, a Scottsdale, Ariz., artisan who says he is close to his grandfather (whom he calls "Paka") and has even brought boyfriends to meet him. Ross, who is HIV-positive but healthy, adds, "We haven't really talked about it. He's so funny. He says, 'You people need to stand up for your rights' – one of those 'you people' kind of things."

So, yes, amusingly enough, you are arguing for more government control in your posts. So that would make you, according to your axis...a liberal seeking to launch a system of tyranny over the country.

Oxlar · May 6, 2009

Pladio said:
I just read about this again a few hours ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

I think it's really a universal law ...

Fuck you Pladio, to the ignore list you go.

Oxlar · May 6, 2009

Prime Junta said:
If you're not careful, who knows what kind of leftist tyranny you might end up in.

Boy howdy, thats the first time I'm in agreement with you.

Ubereil · May 6, 2009

Oxlar said:
Boy howdy, thats the first time I'm in agreement with you.

He was being ironic. Scandinavian countries are pretty much as left as it gets when it comes to western countries.

Übereil

Oxlar · May 6, 2009

Rithrandil said:
I also just want to throw this up there, too, to further explain my point about how Conservative/Constitutional-ist views of how America should work can't be used to support restrictions on homosexual rights, despite what you may think local governments "should" be able to do, Oxlar. You're making the Conservative argument here - small government, government should stay out of our lives, etc - but you're not applying it equally. The government should stay out of *everyone's* private lives - and that means Constituonal rights should apply to heterosexuals and homosexuals equally. How do I know this?

Why, because the founder of American Conservatism, Barry Goldwater, said so!

So, yes, amusingly enough, you are arguing for more government control in your posts. So that would make you, according to your axis...a liberal seeking to launch a system of tyranny over the country.

He didn't say anything different that what I've said. I never said gays don't have the constitutional right to be gay. I didn't say they shouldn't serve in the military unless it can be demonstrated that their presence has some sort of negative effect upon morale.

Rithrandil · May 6, 2009

You said it'd be okay for the government to ban their right to get married and adopt. You also specifically said you didn't want them to adopt. You also aren't fine with any sort of PDAs, too, apparently.

Edit: You also said eugenics was part of the "Darwin Movement", by which I guess you mean science.

Oxlar · May 6, 2009

Prime Junta said:
Specifically, in modern political science, 'democracy' refers to a principle of government ('of, by, and for the people'), whereas 'republic' refers to a form of government (by some kind of chamber of representatives, with executive power usually vested in some kind of cabinet of ministers or a president). There are nondemocratic republics (e.g. Cuba, Iran, or North Korea), and democratic non-republics (e.g. Sweden, The Netherlands, the United Kingdom). The original, Aristotelian use of 'democracy' to refer to, effectively, mob rule, is only in active use by Americans of a certain, specific political persuasion. I'm not sure why, but I surmise that it's fundamentally a rhetorical trick to discredit another political party in the same country, which has 'Democratic' in its name.

And once again you guys are using your own made up definitions. Go look up the word. It states a 'form' of government and will even say majority rule which is the same thing as mob rule.

Dart was right, there is simply no way to even discuss anything with you guys when you can't even use established definitions.

And with that, I'm done and out. This is the last post for me as this has been one big exercize in futility. Your debate tactics to slander and erronously mis quote or imply what others are saying in order to keep them on the defensive is quite transparent, and I refuse to play this game of yours anymore. Maybe some day, you will be willing to have a serious meeting of the minds. This will obviously not be that day. It is quite obvious that there are cultural barriers especially when it comes to understanding the role of government between your country and mine.

As far as Darwin and eugenics, YOU FAIL AT READING. I never said darwin supported the idea of eugenics. To say someone is a fan of something does not imply that the originator is a fan of his fan. Get it? And for those that wish to learn more: http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/eugenics/list3.pl

Bye bye.

Pladio · May 6, 2009

Prime Junta said:
Actually, now that you mention it, there was an IMO warranted discussion about anti-Semitism in Star Wars over this character:

Quote: "Mind tricks don't work on me, only money."

For laughs:
They should have included claws and some more influential senators from this race and then it would have been perfect...

Other than that:
Star Wars does feature lots of prominent WWII/Hitler themes in its movies...
The most important one being a charismatic leader's rise to power through democratic means and then getting all the power of the country... Then discriminating against people.

Rithrandil · May 6, 2009

Oxlar said:
And once again you guys are using your own made up definitions. Go look up the word. It states a 'form' of government and will even say majority rule which is the same thing as mob rule.

I'm an American and I have a degree in political science. The modern definition has shifted to include most modern Republics today. So no, you're wrong.

Oxlar said:
Dart was right, there is simply no way to even discuss anything with you guys when you can't even use established definitions.

And with that, I'm done and out. This is the last post for me as this has been one big exercize in futility. Your debate tactics to slander and erronously mis quote or imply what others are saying in order to keep them on the defensive is quite transparent, and I refuse to play this game of yours anymore. Maybe some day, you will be willing to have a serious meeting of the minds. This will obviously not be that day. It is quite obvious that there are cultural barriers especially when it comes to understanding the role of government between your country and mine.

Bye bye.

We are using established definitions. Ours aren't from Aristotle or the 1700s, though. "Democracy" has been widely known to be equivalent to "Republic" since...I don't know, the early 20th century? The "Arsenal of Democracy" and all that?

And, by the way, I live in America. Regardless, see ya. Have fun elsewhere.

Edit:

Oxlar said:
As far as Darwin and eugenics, YOU FAIL AT READING. I never said darwin supported the idea of eugenics. To say someone is a fan of something does not imply that the originator is a fan of his fan. Get it? And for those that wish to learn more: http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/eugenics/list3.pl

You called it the "Darwin Movement", when he specifically said he was glad natural selection had been pretty much defeated by human progress. Oh, and by the way, YOU FAIL AT MAKING ARGUMENTS. You've said multiple times and have been quoted multiple times of saying you think it'd be alright for the government to legislate against homosexuals and you didn't want them to adopt children.

So yes, I'm ready for a serious meeting of the minds when you're able to participate.

Prime Junta · May 6, 2009

Oxlar said:
And once again you guys are using your own made up definitions. Go look up the word. It states a 'form' of government and will even say majority rule which is the same thing as mob rule.

I did. Here's a pretty good discussion:

[ http://www.democracy-building.info/definition-democracy.html ]

Today, the majority of democratic countries in the world are republics, i.e. officials are elected. Some well-established democratic countries in Europe, however, (the United Kingdom, Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxemburg and the Scandinavian countries) are constitutional monarchies, i.e. a king or queen is head of state while the constitution guarantees nevertheless all basic rights as in any democratic republic and sets clear limits to duties and competences of the monarch. Such a king can be regarded as a stabilizing factor rather than as a danger for a democracy. Therefore the classical definition of democracy is little helpful - at least concerning monarchy.

Pretty close to my concise explanation, no?

Bye bye.

Don't let the door hit ya, and so on!

Pladio · May 6, 2009

nessosin said:
Damn, one leaves a forum thread for a few days and trolls sprout all over .

As I dont have all the time in the world to read this thread to the end Ill progressively try to enter once again into this fascinating discussion.

And as of now Ill just ask all of you wheter or not do you think that fining a private hotel, a private people, for their decision is normal? Because it seems to me that in pursuit of making homosexuals feel liked etc Finland just boarded violation of freedom of hers civilians-heterosexuals.

When I read things like this it becomes obvious to me that so called "civilized" western countries are becoming more and more a hostages of thier minorities.
Tension arises and rather than welcoming homosexuals(or any other minority) to society it may lead to further ostracism.

So, you think it's okay for a family to have to get extra rooms in a hotel, for the sole and only reason of them being gay ?

Pladio · May 6, 2009

Oxlar said:
Lets see if I can get this reply in before the thread is closed.

The substitution example said a JOKE about homosexuals being gay, not that they are gay. And as far as I'm aware, most would find such jokes offensive just as they find jokes offensive about blacks or jews.

So if youre in agreement with the pre substituted statement, according to PJ's test, you are a bigot. Personally, i could care less. Its not my test.

Actually, I do like jokes about Jews (as long as I know it's a joke) and I love hearing jokes about other stereotypes too (again, as long as everyone at the table knows, they're nothing more than jokes).

Pladio · May 7, 2009

Prime Junta said:
Absolutely -- "the Jews stabbed us in the back in the Great War, which is why we lost," "the Jews control banking and commerce and that's why our economy is going to hell," "the Jews control culture and poison our children's minds with their corrupting influence," what have you.

(BTW, it's fun to be on the same side of a debate with you for a change.)

This actually made me laugh

Pladio · May 7, 2009

Ubereil said:
It's also a no-brainer. The same thing can be said about anything. Mentioning Radiohead? The more posts, the more likely it becomes. With an infinitive amount of posts the probability of someone mentioning Radiohead is 1.

Übereil

But, this happened a lot sooner than infinity.

SW:TOR - No Homosexuality

Watchdog

Guardian of Nonsense

Keeper of the Watch

Guardian of Nonsense

Guardian of Nonsense

RPGCodex' Little BRO

SasqWatch

Watchdog

Watchdog

Keeper of the Watch

Watchdog

SasqWatch

Watchdog

Guardian of Nonsense

SasqWatch

RPGCodex' Little BRO

Guardian of Nonsense

Guardian of Nonsense

Guardian of Nonsense

Guardian of Nonsense