EPTYou should have your man-cards revoked.
The Automated Ban List - Page 2027
| Forum Index > TL Community |
This thread is for discussing recent bans. Don't discuss other topics here. Take it to website feedback if you disagree with a ban or want to raise an issue. Keep it civil. NOTE: For those of you who want to find the actual ABL thread where the bans are posted. Please look in here: https://tl.net/forum/closed-threads/ | ||
|
MasterOfPuppets
Romania6942 Posts
You should have your man-cards revoked. | ||
|
Caihead
Canada8550 Posts
On August 08 2013 23:29 Kleinmuuhg wrote: I dont get why that posts upsets you so much? Homosexual couples do not produce offspring. Really depends on your definition of normal. In my eyes unnormal can be used as a word without any judgement to it. If it is used as in "standard", then yes, as numbers show, hetero would be standard or "normal". That's as stupid as saying "Because intelligent people tend to have less offspring, or voluntarily choose to not have children; where as the poor and uneducated often have many children which perpetuates poverty. We have much more evidence that being poor and uneducated is the better model and the norm because there are more people in that category." It's stupid because in defining the norm the writer is also assigning with it moral dignity and authority over the people who are "not in the norm". Even though minorities deserve the same rights and protection from the tyranny of the masses. | ||
Myles
United States5162 Posts
| ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
On August 08 2013 23:38 Caihead wrote: That's as stupid as saying "Because intelligent people tend to have less offspring, or voluntarily choose to not have children; where as the poor and uneducated often have many children which perpetuates poverty. We have much more evidence that being poor and uneducated is the better model and the norm because there are more people in that category." It's stupid because in defining the norm the writer is also assigning with it moral dignity and authority over the people who are "not in the norm". Even though minorities deserve the same rights and protection from the tyranny of the masses. Are you quoting the movie "Idiocracy" ? | ||
|
Caihead
Canada8550 Posts
I don't know, seems pretty much common sense to me, also tyranny of the masses is from John Stuart Mill. | ||
|
MasterOfPuppets
Romania6942 Posts
Trust me, the movie wasn't the source of those notions nor the first to analyze potential consequences and ramifications. Although it did bring the issue to the attention of a more mainstream crowd, and did so quite well imo, so that's a good thing. And yeah, like Caihead said, it's only common sense. (more like uncommon sense huehuehue i'm now the 1 millionth person to have made this joke) | ||
|
Kleinmuuhg
Vanuatu4091 Posts
On August 08 2013 23:38 Caihead wrote: That's as stupid as saying "Because intelligent people tend to have less offspring, or voluntarily choose to not have children; where as the poor and uneducated often have many children which perpetuates poverty. We have much more evidence that being poor and uneducated is the better model and the norm because there are more people in that category." It's stupid because in defining the norm the writer is also assigning with it moral dignity and authority over the people who are "not in the norm". Even though minorities deserve the same rights and protection from the tyranny of the masses. Let me just defend myself once before I listen to Myles. You are just trying so hard to be offended its amazing. I said I use normal without any judgement yet you go ahead and put words in my mouth like I called it a "better model" or assigning any rights to the norm. Obviously minorities deserve the same right, nobody said anything different. First there are idiotic homophobes, but people like you who just try so hard to be offended and disable any discussion blindly are just as annoying. User was warned for this post | ||
|
Kleinmuuhg
Vanuatu4091 Posts
| ||
|
MasterOfPuppets
Romania6942 Posts
On August 08 2013 23:56 Kleinmuuhg wrote: Okay I am sorry and I accept the warning, but seriously, this thread is made out of 5 % quoting bans 5% "wow no intersting bans today" and 90% offtopic. You could have just posted your reply in the LGBT thread or the Russia thread (or even, get this, through PMs :O !!!) and I'm sure Caihead would've continue the conversation there... Also lol: On August 08 2013 18:30 Val_ wrote: Personally i dont like gays. Gay+Gay+a child is a terrible thing. When I grew up I had a mom and a dad. Dad learned me to stay strong, be man, etc etc, mom also helped to raise me as only woman can. Not two fking pervert "Dads" or "Parent#1 and Parent#2" Do what you want at home. But not on the TV, radio, newspapers, or on the street (this "gay demonstrations", etc) I do not want that my child will see gays and other perverts on the street. Am I the only natural here? ppl? User was temp banned for this post. I don't get it, every single time we have a thread like this people get banned... you'd think there's a limited supply of bigotry, I guess not. | ||
|
SilentchiLL
Germany1405 Posts
On August 08 2013 23:29 Kleinmuuhg wrote: I dont get why that posts upsets you so much? Homosexual couples do not produce offspring. Really depends on your definition of normal. In my eyes unnormal can be used as a word without any judgement to it. If it is used as in "standard", then yes, as numbers show, hetero would be standard or "normal". Actually there are possibilities to create offspring from gay couples by now, look up "male egg" on wikipedia for example. Oh shit just read this page, sorry mods! | ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
| ||
|
SilentchiLL
Germany1405 Posts
On August 08 2013 23:58 MasterOfPuppets wrote: You could have just posted your reply in the LGBT thread or the Russia thread (or even, get this, through PMs :O !!!) and I'm sure Caihead would've continue the conversation there... Also lol: I don't get it, every single time we have a thread like this people get banned... you'd think there's a limited supply of bigotry, I guess not. What I don't understand is why he wasn't permed, that post is horrible, insulting and discriminating in so many ways, he must have a very clean banhistory. I'm not gay, but the lack of logic AND massive amount of ignorance is infuriating, for example how would he know how "only a woman" can raise a child, it's not like he has experience with gay parents and according to that logic single mothers and fathers would be horrible | ||
|
MasterOfPuppets
Romania6942 Posts
On August 09 2013 00:02 ComaDose wrote: now that he has been warned can we talk about that warning? Nope, but we can now that he has been banned by request.  On August 09 2013 00:07 SilentchiLL wrote: What I don't understand is why he wasn't permed, that post is horrible, insulting and discriminating in so many ways, he must have a very clean banhistory. Yeah people who are this radical don't change their views very often, I tend to find. | ||
|
Caihead
Canada8550 Posts
On August 09 2013 00:02 ComaDose wrote: now that he has been warned can we talk about that warning? Only if we talk in terms of general stupidity and catharsis and not the actual topic that they were banned for apparently. | ||
|
MasterOfPuppets
Romania6942 Posts
On August 09 2013 00:07 SilentchiLL wrote: I'm not gay, but the lack of logic AND massive amount of ignorance is infuriating, for example how would he know how "only a woman" can raise a child, it's not like he has experience with gay parents and according to that logic single mothers and fathers would be horrible Welcome to ignorant people. There's a whole lot more of them out there... | ||
|
SilentchiLL
Germany1405 Posts
On August 09 2013 00:09 Caihead wrote: Only if we talk in terms of general stupidity and catharsis and not the actual topic that they were banned for apparently. I was about to say that there was no catharsis because he apparently did something else and got himself banned but then I saw this: Kleinmuuhg was just temp banned for 2 weeks by KadaverBB. That account was created on 2010-09-27 17:47:40 and had 2243 posts. Reason: By request. o7 | ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
On August 08 2013 23:45 MasterOfPuppets wrote: Trust me, the movie wasn't the source of those notions nor the first to analyze potential consequences and ramifications. Although it did bring the issue to the attention of a more mainstream crowd, and did so quite well imo, so that's a good thing. And yeah, like Caihead said, it's only common sense. (more like uncommon sense huehuehue i'm now the 1 millionth person to have made this joke) Yeah i know that but i was sure it was the exact sentence from the start of the movie Also it's been a while we didn't have a ban INSIDE ABL. (other than request). | ||
|
SilentchiLL
Germany1405 Posts
On August 09 2013 00:12 FFW_Rude wrote: Yeah i know that but i was sure it was the exact sentence from the start of the movie Also it's been a while we didn't have a ban INSIDE ABL. (other than request). We still don't have one, klein's was a warning  | ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
| ||
|
nunez
Norway4003 Posts
hm, i am pretty sure i remember something about someone being banned in the abl under VERY STRANGE CIRCUMSTANCES. can't remember who though and not gonna bother flipping through the pages to find.  in addition you have jd getting banned left, right and center for a good stretch of time, he wasn't explicitly asking for it either. at least not that i can remember. | ||
| ||
