|
Nebuchad, you don't get credit for holding dissenting opinions that you rarely expound upon to all takers. I can only remember one time you took two people on at once. The forum is very welcoming of anticapitalists, to the extent you've even posted in that vein of thought.
It's folly to try and dodge the point. The posters here that shitpost all the time aren't mistaken for having unanswerable points by anyone that's not an idiot themselves. No damage is done by ignoring those ones, even if you consider all of xDaunt's in the category.
Try holding a dissenting opinion that gets you called a 'fierce "kinda" intelligent [political party] bot' as happened on the periouvs page. Answer posters repeatedly enough and intelligently enough to make someone think you'd excuse child molestation. God knows there's plenty here that slip into foolish diatribes with very little encouragement.
|
I don't want credit for anything. This forum isn't very tolerant of opinions that are very far to the right, I agree with the substance of what is being said. To frame this reality as "this forum isn't very tolerant of dissenting opinions" is a good rhetorical trick because suddenly the focus is on the intolerance of the response instead of being on the farrightness of the opinions. There's no reason why me or anyone on the left should fall for that trick.
The range of opinions that is tolerated by most people is based on the Overton window. In 2016 there was a bunch of liberals on the forum, kwiz, Biff, oneofthem, zlefin, ticklish, and so on, who were very intolerant of any idea to the left of liberalism when it came to the democratic primary, and as a result of that the forum was way to the right of the rest of my internet experience, and there was some amount of dissent. That happened in large part due to the negative coverage by the american media that is quite obviously biased in favor of the right wing, and due to how much trust was being put into said media by most people on this forum.
Then Hillary lost, Mohdoo, P6 and farva (farva less so, he was already pretty left but still a little bit) shifted left, kwiz went away... and as a result I have a feeling that the 2020 experience will be quite different when it comes to leftwing dissent. I could be wrong, we'll see.
Some other scenarios could have happened. If instead of doing absolutely nothing except give the rich a bunch of money and fuck over some minorities, Trump had done some good things for America, then the Overton window would have shifted to the right, and you'd have a different forum now when it comes to tolerance of opinions. If Hillary had won you'd have a different forum now when it comes to tolerance of opinions. We're all playing the hand we're dealt.
|
Are we living in an alt reality where xdaunt doesn't keep going until whoever xdaunt is arguing with gives up and ignores xdaunt letting him have the last word (or xdaunt decides to get banned), till the cycle starts over again?
In recent memory alone there was "abortion is evil" and then US pol posters decided to ignore xdaunt.
|
where does he say “abortion is evil” and keep going till everyone stops
|
On March 15 2019 07:27 IgnE wrote:
where does he say “abortion is evil” and keep going till everyone stops
The funniest part about his post is that the usual garbage rap on me is that I keep posting until someone proves me wrong, at which point I run away with my tail between my legs and stop posting.
|
I never gave it much thought when it was around, but I miss the USPol Blog.
I guess that's why the saying is, "you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone."
|
On March 15 2019 07:27 IgnE wrote:
where does he say “abortion is evil” and keep going till everyone stops
On February 27 2019 09:10 xDaunt wrote:
Abortion is evil.
Well, that was easy. Exact word for word.
You too could had literally written" abortion is evil" and xdaunt in the search. I didn't expect to be able to find it so easily, but he literally wrote this word for word, and I was expecting to be wrong by a word and have to search through his posts, but there you go. The rest of the post is even worse.
|
Except that he just states it and lets everyone else have the last word. So you are basically living in an alternate universe.
|
|
|
Is it actually a thing for the pro-life movement to consider the removal of dead babies morally wrong? Or even an abortion?
|
|
|
On March 15 2019 23:16 JimmiC wrote:
Yes, at least 12 states it is illegal. And in others they often get them done at the same clinics so those grieving mothers also get to deal with the protesters ignorant comments, spitting and so on. Kwark brought it up when you said it was evil. You ignored it so I have no idea your personal opinion but from your later statements my presumption was still "evil" but should be allowed.
Which states forbid the removal of dead babies? Are you sure that you're not confusing "dead" for "unviable?" Those are two very different concepts.
EDIT: My line of questioning should make it readily apparent why I didn't respond to the questions in the main thread in the first place.
|
|
|
On March 15 2019 22:43 IgnE wrote:
Except that he just states it and lets everyone else have the last word. So you are basically living in an alternate universe.
At this point you are just being contrary for the sake of contrary.
|
On March 15 2019 22:54 JimmiC wrote:
There are posts by him and others after that, but most realize that it is getting out of hand and not moving forward so they stop. I find that to be a super offensive statement because me and my wife had a baby who got the cord wrapped around her neck and she died in my wife. We then had to go in and take the drugs so my wife could pass her lifeless child. We did this because not only is it emotionally excruciating to have your baby die and still be inside you. But there are many many complications that can arise for the mother. That some jerk would then think my wife is evil because of some stupid interpretation of of a book written by people (not god) 2000 years ago about something those people couldn't conceive. Is not only stupid, but it is offensive. And I think the hypocrite that can read the bible and get hate out of it towards anyone or any group are the evil ones. The worst offenders are these religious personalities that beg for money to fight "gays" or what ever and then have net worth in the 100's of millions (see pat Robertson). Yep those guys are trying to be like Jesus. Talk about suckers following these sociopaths.
I don't say this story so you will feel bad for me. I put it out there because there are real people with real heart breaking situations that happen every freaking day. And when ignorant people make blanket statements and treat life black and white they do hurt people. Way more often, and way deeper than they think. These assholes should stop putting all their money and effort into hating on women who make the horrible life long scaring decision of abortion. And perhaps instead follow all the practices of love and acceptance that are also their in the bible in the more recent part, and the part that makes christians christain.
Jesus. This is what I'm trying to convey to people every time I see the "abortion is evil" shit that props up sometimes on this forum, and especially over on Reddit. People don't have abortions because they think it's fucking hilarious to "murder babies", they do it because they have to, and it sucks for everyone involved. Some people have an unbelievably hard time understanding this simple concept.
A lot of Christians have swayed really really far away from the ideas and concepts the bible was originally meant to convey. They pick and choose bits of the bible that they want to follow and not the rest, while ignoring the fundamentals it's built upon.
|
On March 16 2019 00:41 JimmiC wrote:
What a even more awful experience for the parents that have to go through that. And imagine people also yelling at them calling them evil, spitting and so on. The ignorance of these people is almost unfathomable. How dare they make the horrible decision about ending the suffering early of the baby and protecting the wife, or keeping the baby to term and watching it die a painful death. It is like the morons who protest this shit do not understand that this is not something parents want to do, it is basically the worst thing you can possibly do. And a lose lose choice that will always suck.
As to your other question I'm not sure the rules of all states and perhaps it is just unviable, perhaps not I tend to not dig super deep because it just makes me mad and sad to do so. But to me it is a little bit of a difference without distinction because both are horribly awful, both leave the parents blaming themselves regardless of circumstance and both deserve the support of the community as they try to heal through the pain of losing a child instead of the hate and anger of ignorant people who believe some asshole who claims "god says its bad".
Let's just get the obvious out of the way: what the protesters are doing at the clinics is wrong. Whether to get an abortion, regardless of the circumstances, is not an easy decision for anyone involved. And everyone involved pays a heavy personal price, in large part because, at least at some level, they understand that there's something morally suspect about the abortion. The reason why the "dead baby" construction of aborting unviable fetuses is so despicable is that it intentionally distorts what is actually happening in an attempt to euphemize the act so as to avoid the moral consequences of the decision. Killing is killing, whether it be murder, war, or abortions.
If it makes you feel better, I probably would have recommended that my wife get an abortion if she had had an unviable fetus during one of her pregnancies, and I would not make it illegal to do so. But that has no bearing on the underlying morality of the act. That which is legal and that which is moral are two different things.
|
|
|
Stories abound. My pro life friend was an unviable fetus for several months up to birth. She was diagnosed with huge abnormalities that guaranteed a death soon after birth. Her mom still wanted to have her after being encouraged to have an abortion by her doctors, friends, and family. Some of the stuff they said to her mom was pure evil.
The surgeons were ready the second she was born to operate. She was rushed into the operating room, mom didn’t even get to hold her. Everything was fine inside. No problems. She’s in her early thirties now. She has had to exercise a lot of forgiveness to the people that wanted to kill her.
I’m very much at odds with people that deny the humanity of the fetus to make it sound like abortion is as morally unquestionable as removing a tumor. Ok. I know the current political climate means compromise on when to legally permit the killing of your unborn child (and who decides). None of that justifies the baby-killers protestors of clinics.
There’s also the morally grey protestors that remind expectant mothers that their baby has a heartbeat, can feel pain, and know the sound of their mothers voice. I know people who are alive today because their mom changed their mind a few steps from the door of the abortion clinic. Talk to them and you might find a moral dilemma condemning all protestors.
|
|
|
On March 16 2019 02:06 Danglars wrote:
Her mom still wanted to have her after being encouraged to have an abortion by her doctors, friends, and family. Some of the stuff they said to her mom was pure evil.
Like what? There's a awful lot of painting of evil going on here, but what exactly is said that is pure evil?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
