As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

A United Europe?

123468

Posts

  • NartwakNartwak Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Miscarriages are manslaughter, you can't deny it. (Masturbation is genocide)

    Nartwak on
  • WMain00WMain00 Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Well as you'll have already guessed earlier i'm quite Anti-EU, and the yes result is bad news for me. Particularly at the thought of *grumble* President Blair.

    How ironic. You commit utter war crimes and occupy a country illegally and Europe's willing to give you Presidency. And he's a born again Catholic so that will suit the Vatican no end.

    God (haha) help us.

    WMain00 on
  • HerrCronHerrCron It that wickedly supports taxation Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I feel almost compelled to point out there is no president of the EU, nor will there be one if Lisbon is ratified.

    The position that people seem to think Blair might get is the president of the European Council, which is currently moved between various heads of state in six month shifts.

    Should Lisbon be passed the post will be a 2 and half year term, which would basically make Blair a mix between a chairperson and a secretary, with no vote and no ability to set the agenda, should he get it.

    Which i doubt he will anyway.

    HerrCron on
    sig.gif
  • MuppetmanMuppetman Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I quite like the idea that Blair is actually there purely to take the minutes and organise who wants tea and coffee :)

    Muppetman on
    camo_sig2-400.png
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    please... A sinecure where he doesn't have to do a damn shit, but can moralise and make grandiose speeches to his heart's content?

    A meaningless puff piece of job, he where he can pretend to lord it over the rest of us?

    People standing between Blair and EU presidency will only have themselves to blame if they get run over.

    Kipling217 on
    The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
  • XrddXrdd Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    saggio wrote: »
    Why was there such opposition to Turkey*'s bid to join the EU? Crazy ethnic and religious nationalism lead by Austria and the Vatican, afterall Muslims aren't true Europeans and there's hardly any in Europe anyway, right? Not like millions in France alone or anything.

    *Constantinople forever!

    Yes, it's utterly irrational to dislike the idea of letting a country where the majority of the population is opposed to christians and jews (not to mention atheists) serving in the military or the police and deems these groups unfit for holding any political office join the EU.
    Oh, and there is the whole widespread corruption thing, plus a whole bunch of other social and economic factors.

    Xrdd on
  • Dis'Dis' Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    saggio wrote: »
    Why was there such opposition to Turkey*'s bid to join the EU? Crazy ethnic and religious nationalism lead by Austria and the Vatican, afterall Muslims aren't true Europeans and there's hardly any in Europe anyway, right? Not like millions in France alone or anything.

    *Constantinople forever!

    Well there are reasonable objections to Turkey joining right now (namely their large population would give them a lot of clout and rock the current political vote, cause trouble with free movement, and cost the net-payer EU nations some serious cash to bring the country up to code whilst we're still helping out eastern Europe).

    @Xrdd: its more that no one votes for Atheists in Turkey - pretty much like the US. Plus the corruption is considerably less than Bulgaria and Romania, which were happily let in...

    Dis' on
  • XrddXrdd Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Dis' wrote: »
    @Xrdd: its more that no one votes for Atheists in Turkey - pretty much like the US. Plus the corruption is considerably less than Bulgaria and Romania, which were happily let in...

    I wasn't just refering to people not voting for non-muslims. I was talking about a recent survey I read about in the paper. It also showed that people in Turkey tend to distrust people with non-muslims religious backgrounds and many of them would not like to have them as neighbors. I'll try and see if I can find an English source.
    As for Bulgaria and Romania, I had plenty of problems with expanding the EU in Eastern Europe (corruption, cost...), but, well, what's done is done.

    EDIT: Here you go:
    When asked where they believed members of non-Muslim minority communities should not work, 57 percent said in the intelligence agency; 55 percent in the judiciary, the police department and the military; 51 percent in senior political posts; 46 percent as mayors; 44 percent in science institutions; and 44 percent in medical institutions.
    [...]
    When asked who they would not like as a next-door neighbor, 57 percent said an atheist family, followed by a Jewish family at 42 percent, a Christian family at 35 percent and 18 percent for a family from overseas. Thirteen percent said they would not like to live next door to an Alevi family.

    Xrdd on
  • theSquidtheSquid Sydney, AustraliaRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I'm all for the more progressive countries in Europe to bond, and be able to collectively expand and include other European nations with like-minded philosophies. I think the sooner we can have a sane leading world power, the better. I'm tired of America's crap. When someone like Obama is considered by them to be conservative, then I'll start liking that country again.

    theSquid on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Aegis wrote: »
    I'm extremely confused as to why an economic common market should give a fuck about abortion or gay marriage.

    Implementing continental policy on social issues seems rather outside the scope of the EU.

    I don't see this as entirely out of the question. The EU's had institutional creep (what institution doesn't) since its founding. That it's now experimenting with social policy kind of fits with moving from strictly economic concerns, into a more continental-union-type-thing-something.

    I mean, you could almost argue that it was inevitable. The forces that would spur economic interdependence would eventually broaden to domestic-issue interdependence not just for economic concerns, but for harmonizing other concerns.

    If they start infringing on sovereignty the whole thing will collapse very very very very quickly.

    Even if the politicians don't care the citizens will be baying for blood. I know it's a terribly dirty word in Europe, but nationalism is very much alive and well over there, and the French won't take kindly to Germans writing their laws (as an example.)

    Eh, I dunno. It seems like it would largely depend on how they go about doing it and over what sort of time frame. Where they stand today would have been inconceivable to just about everyone 60 years ago. Who knows what other impossible things will get accomplished over the next 60 years.

    moniker on
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I would like a united Europe.

    Maybe then we could withdraw from NATO.

    Speaker on
  • AegisAegis Fear My Dance Overshot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Why would a united Europe result in a withdrawal from NATO?

    Aegis on
    We'll see how long this blog lasts
    Currently DMing: None :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
  • SanderJKSanderJK Crocodylus Pontifex Sinterklasicus Madrid, 3000 ADRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    European law has basic anti-discrimination rights, and those are applied to members who institute anti-gay legislation, which is still quite common in eastern europe. It's a bit of a friction point, but I don't see the leap into forcing gay marriage on all the members.

    As for Turkey, I'm generally pro-Europe, but there are quite a few issues with Turkey that are somewhat unique to Turkey. The way the Turks treat the Kurds, the fact that even mentioning the word "Armenia" can trigger international incidents, the issue of Cyprus, the precarious balance between the intellectuals/army backed secularists vs the majority backed highly religious government, or even the pragmatic fact that stretching Europe's borders far into asia towards such states as Syria, Iraq and Iran.

    SanderJK on
    Steam: SanderJK Origin: SanderJK
  • Casual EddyCasual Eddy The Astral PlaneRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Modern Man wrote: »
    Kastanj wrote: »
    You can't have "opinions" about human rights. Basically, allowing men with long hair to marry while denying gay people the same is eternally and unquestioningly stupid to a psychotic degree, and saying that abortion should always be illegal is likewise detached from reality.
    You show the typical parochialism of a European liberal who seems to think that their own views on certain social issues, such as abortion and gay marriage, are the end-all and be-all. The fact that people in other countries have different views from your oh-so-advanced Scandinavian ideals may rock your world, but that just shows how insular that world is.
    I'm not "disagreeing" with you (as if this was some little issue like parking fine levels or the idea of a flat tax) - I'm wondering what other aspect of reality will need to be rejected in order to satisfy the social regressives and anti-secularists of Europe. If you can act as if a lump of cells is infused with some humanity you are capable of believing anything.
    The idea that all human life is deserving of protection seems like a pretty strong stand in support of human rights. But, I guess you only support human rights for human beings who are convenient to you.
    It's all or nothing with the bible, for tryst's sake! Otherwise it is no longer a divine document but a lodestone around humanity's ankle from a disgusting era where women were raped as punishment for being raped.[/B]
    It's not up to you to decide how Catholics interpret their religious texts. As a non-Catholic, your (and mine) views on that are wholly irrelevant. Who asked you, anyway?
    I'm all for human rights and at least building a society around grade-school logic but if a bunch of emotional fucking plebeians are going to sulk then fine I'll guess I'll just have to wait for the socially regressive segment of Europe to die off and then spend the rest of my life doing everything I can to destroy the traces of idiocy they managed to stash away in their children when their senses of skepticism were still non-existent (I'm not saying this is the origin of your opinions).
    Snobbery combined with traces of fascism. How charming.
    Saying that abortions should always be illegal is like saying a woman is worth no more than a zygote.
    Human life is human life. Not all of us have been brainwashed into the culture of death that you seem to love so much.

    illegalizing abortion is a tool of oppressing humans, nothing else. Don't even try to pretend it is in any way humanitarian.

    Casual Eddy on
  • Witch_Hunter_84Witch_Hunter_84 Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Doesn't Germany have a beef with letting Turkey join the EU as long as they refuse to recognize the Armenian genocide?

    Witch_Hunter_84 on
    If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten in your presence.
  • PicardathonPicardathon Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    theSquid wrote: »
    I'm all for the more progressive countries in Europe to bond, and be able to collectively expand and include other European nations with like-minded philosophies. I think the sooner we can have a sane leading world power, the better. I'm tired of America's crap. When someone like Obama is considered by them to be conservative, then I'll start liking that country again.

    Uh...when would Obama be considered to be conservative by the US, ever?
    Hell, fifty years ago homosexuality was pretty much illegal in the US. Now we're arguing whether or not they should be married.
    Also, steamrolling the other person's position and calling them an inhumane monster is clearly a great argument, always. Really, great technique.

    Picardathon on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Uh...when would Obama be considered to be conservative by the US, ever?

    I sincerely hope it's within my lifetime.

    What constitutes "liberal" and "moderate" have been stagnant for far too long.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2009
    theSquid wrote: »
    I'm all for the more progressive countries in Europe to bond, and be able to collectively expand and include other European nations with like-minded philosophies. I think the sooner we can have a sane leading world power, the better. I'm tired of America's crap. When someone like Obama is considered by them to be conservative, then I'll start liking that country again.

    Uh...when would Obama be considered to be conservative by the US, ever?
    Hell, fifty years ago homosexuality was pretty much illegal in the US. Now we're arguing whether or not they should be married.
    Also, steamrolling the other person's position and calling them an inhumane monster is clearly a great argument, always. Really, great technique.

    You have to draw the line and do so deeply, so that anyone who tries to go "there" finds themselves losing credibility at a rate of about 9.81 m/s^2.

    That's how it works. Some idiot tells tries to tell me it is not fucking insane and evil to apply biblical code partially and for convenience, I tell that person I hope they never experience a happy moment again in their entire lives. Some pusgargling shitsoul tries to tell me that honest-to-goodness human life as recognized in law begins at conception and abortions should always be illegal, I point out that that person fucks his/her mother. Some thoughts ARE inhumane and monstrous once you look at their essences and their logical conclusions.

    That isn't me "steamrolling" anyone (I say that should someone try to sardonically accuse me of "liberal fascism" or something equally retarded). That is me telling people that 2+2 doesn't equal "We must preserve shitty aspects of the world because change is scary!" and if they still try to pull that plebeian anti-liberty shit right in front of me I'll cut them open, shove a fistful of ants into their abdomen and then sew them shut again.

    I'm so perfectly fatigued with and irrevocably devoid of tolerance towards all the anti-human bullshit societies try to pull out of convenience and moral, intellectual and political mediocrity. Banning abortions is fucking evil and letting divorcees remarry while denying gay people the privilege is an idea only a person of low ways and low mind could possibly conceive. End of story, I will not apply any skepticism to my statements, curtains forever and get the cunt out of my way if my lack of tenderness bothers you.

    You can't enslave people, you can't ban abortions and you can't deny gay people the right to marry unless you also try to apply the entire bible to society. We don't live in a universe where I will question the validity and metaphysical quality of these three statements. It is entirely impossible to ever make me entertain the possibility that I am wrong or "hostile to dissent and people who disagree" - others can uselessly waste their time and standing in my eyes debating such topics to their hearts' content, but don't bother with me. My mind is closed on these subjects and I'll spend my life trying to make others follow suit.

    Kastanj on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • CycloneRangerCycloneRanger Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    theSquid wrote: »
    I'm all for the more progressive countries in Europe to bond, and be able to collectively expand and include other European nations with like-minded philosophies. I think the sooner we can have a sane leading world power, the better. I'm tired of America's crap. When someone like Obama is considered by them to be conservative, then I'll start liking that country again.

    Uh...when would Obama be considered to be conservative by the US, ever?
    Hell, fifty years ago homosexuality was pretty much illegal in the US. Now we're arguing whether or not they should be married.
    Also, steamrolling the other person's position and calling them an inhumane monster is clearly a great argument, always. Really, great technique.

    You have to draw the line and do so deeply, so that anyone who tries to go "there" finds themselves losing credibility at a rate of about 9.81 m/s^2.

    That's how it works. Some idiot tells tries to tell me it is not fucking insane and evil to apply biblical code partially and for convenience, I tell that person I hope they never experience a happy moment again in their entire lives. Some pusgargling shitsoul tries to tell me that honest-to-goodness human life as recognized in law begins at conception and abortions should always be illegal, I point out that that person fucks his/her mother. Some thoughts ARE inhumane and monstrous once you look at their essences and their logical conclusions.

    That isn't me "steamrolling" anyone (I say that should someone try to sardonically accuse me of "liberal fascism" or something equally retarded). That is me telling people that 2+2 doesn't equal "We must preserve shitty aspects of the world because change is scary!" and if they still try to pull that plebeian anti-liberty shit right in front of me I'll cut them open, shove a fistful of ants into their abdomen and then sew them shut again.

    I'm so perfectly fatigued with and irrevocably devoid of tolerance towards all the anti-human bullshit societies try to pull out of convenience and moral, intellectual and political mediocrity. Banning abortions is fucking evil and letting divorcees remarry while denying gay people the privilege is an idea only a person of low ways and low mind could possibly conceive. End of story, I will not apply any skepticism to my statements, curtains forever and get the cunt out of my way if my lack of tenderness bothers you.

    You can't enslave people, you can't ban abortions and you can't deny gay people the right to marry unless you also try to apply the entire bible to society. We don't live in a universe where I will question the validity and metaphysical quality of these three statements. It is entirely impossible to ever make me entertain the possibility that I am wrong or "hostile to dissent and people who disagree" - others can uselessly waste their time and standing in my eyes debating such topics to their hearts' content, but don't bother with me. My mind is closed on these subjects and I'll spend my life trying to make others follow suit.
    It tickles me to think of just how hard you're going to fail on that last point with your attitude. It will be like watching a man strike a stone with his fist until there is nothing but a ruined stump, while ignoring the hammer right next to him.

    CycloneRanger on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    There comes a point where you have to stop pretending that everyone in the discussion is a reasonable person and start marginalizing the ones that are willing to take the hate stance.

    We had to do it with civil rights, and we're nearing it again with gay rights.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    theSquid wrote: »
    I'm all for the more progressive countries in Europe to bond, and be able to collectively expand and include other European nations with like-minded philosophies. I think the sooner we can have a sane leading world power, the better. I'm tired of America's crap. When someone like Obama is considered by them to be conservative, then I'll start liking that country again.

    Uh...when would Obama be considered to be conservative by the US, ever?
    Hell, fifty years ago homosexuality was pretty much illegal in the US. Now we're arguing whether or not they should be married.
    Also, steamrolling the other person's position and calling them an inhumane monster is clearly a great argument, always. Really, great technique.

    You have to draw the line and do so deeply, so that anyone who tries to go "there" finds themselves losing credibility at a rate of about 9.81 m/s^2.

    That's how it works. Some idiot tells tries to tell me it is not fucking insane and evil to apply biblical code partially and for convenience, I tell that person I hope they never experience a happy moment again in their entire lives. Some pusgargling shitsoul tries to tell me that honest-to-goodness human life as recognized in law begins at conception and abortions should always be illegal, I point out that that person fucks his/her mother. Some thoughts ARE inhumane and monstrous once you look at their essences and their logical conclusions.

    That isn't me "steamrolling" anyone (I say that should someone try to sardonically accuse me of "liberal fascism" or something equally retarded). That is me telling people that 2+2 doesn't equal "We must preserve shitty aspects of the world because change is scary!" and if they still try to pull that plebeian anti-liberty shit right in front of me I'll cut them open, shove a fistful of ants into their abdomen and then sew them shut again.

    I'm so perfectly fatigued with and irrevocably devoid of tolerance towards all the anti-human bullshit societies try to pull out of convenience and moral, intellectual and political mediocrity. Banning abortions is fucking evil and letting divorcees remarry while denying gay people the privilege is an idea only a person of low ways and low mind could possibly conceive. End of story, I will not apply any skepticism to my statements, curtains forever and get the cunt out of my way if my lack of tenderness bothers you.

    You can't enslave people, you can't ban abortions and you can't deny gay people the right to marry unless you also try to apply the entire bible to society. We don't live in a universe where I will question the validity and metaphysical quality of these three statements. It is entirely impossible to ever make me entertain the possibility that I am wrong or "hostile to dissent and people who disagree" - others can uselessly waste their time and standing in my eyes debating such topics to their hearts' content, but don't bother with me. My mind is closed on these subjects and I'll spend my life trying to make others follow suit.
    It tickles me to think of just how hard you're going to fail on that last point with your attitude. It will be like watching a man strike a stone with his fist until there is nothing but a ruined stump, while ignoring the hammer right next to him.

    The problem is that the minute I try to be anything less than utterly demanding and ruthless I depreciate my argument. I can't argue for the fact that a legal human being cannot exist in a bolus of cells - that is instantly humiliating, pathetic and even counter-productive - it legitimizes the otiose wavering and quivering of the people who are too stupid to agree with me outright, so the minute I've properly argued my point they'll just select another idiotic opinion and demand attention and might even try to stop society from developing by abusing the necessary indulgences society has to extend them.

    Instead, the best course of action is to force reality onto people without bothering to worry about concerns of democracy - democracy should simply not have a say on some issues ("But Kastanj can't you see other people have tried that before with horrible resu-" Oh shut the fucking shut up that spiel is neither sagacious, intelligent nor applicable here).
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    There comes a point where you have to stop pretending that everyone in the discussion is a reasonable person and start marginalizing the ones that are willing to take the hate stance.

    We had to do it with civil rights, and we're nearing it again with gay rights.

    Slam Dunk, reverberating through the hall. Young children in the crowd start believing in themselves and the antagonist team's nasty coach throws his cap angrily to the floor while the triumphant synth music starts playing.

    It's the mentally average, the emo religious ("Noooo if you force us to recognize reality you'll disrupt the precious LARP our parents grafted onto our spinal cords when we were defenseless waaaah you're a leftistelitistfascist who hates religious people waaaaah politicians come heeeelp!") and the cowards in society who have allowed homophobia to escape the hatred and disgust we subject racism to. Go directly to the politicians and shove your undeniably just and sensible values down their throats instead. Assert reality.

    Kastanj on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • SanderJKSanderJK Crocodylus Pontifex Sinterklasicus Madrid, 3000 ADRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Doesn't Germany have a beef with letting Turkey join the EU as long as they refuse to recognize the Armenian genocide?

    And the Greeks will never vote for it until Cyprus is resolved. And the current anti-islam enviroment in France, Belgium & The Netherlands (that i'm aware of, probably other countries as well) would make it politically hazardous to suicidal.

    I'd say that over here, perhaps one of the seven main parliamentary parties would vote in favor. Five of them are opposed strongly for some reason or another, one sits on the fence.

    SanderJK on
    Steam: SanderJK Origin: SanderJK
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    There comes a point where you have to stop pretending that everyone in the discussion is a reasonable person and start marginalizing the ones that are willing to take the hate stance.

    We had to do it with civil rights, and we're nearing it again with gay rights.

    Yes, but the way to do it is not to embrace the ridiculous idea that religion must be binary.

    Fencingsax on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    There comes a point where you have to stop pretending that everyone in the discussion is a reasonable person and start marginalizing the ones that are willing to take the hate stance.

    We had to do it with civil rights, and we're nearing it again with gay rights.

    Yes, but the way to do it is not to embrace the ridiculous idea that religion must be binary.
    I never said it was.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    There comes a point where you have to stop pretending that everyone in the discussion is a reasonable person and start marginalizing the ones that are willing to take the hate stance.

    We had to do it with civil rights, and we're nearing it again with gay rights.

    Yes, but the way to do it is not to embrace the ridiculous idea that religion must be binary.
    I never said it was.

    Kastanj is, and it looked like you were trying to defend him to me. I do agree that there are certain things that are equivocally good or evil, trying to tie that into a specific religion seems to be working at cross purposes to what we really want.

    Fencingsax on
  • CycloneRangerCycloneRanger Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    Kastanj wrote: »
    theSquid wrote: »
    I'm all for the more progressive countries in Europe to bond, and be able to collectively expand and include other European nations with like-minded philosophies. I think the sooner we can have a sane leading world power, the better. I'm tired of America's crap. When someone like Obama is considered by them to be conservative, then I'll start liking that country again.

    Uh...when would Obama be considered to be conservative by the US, ever?
    Hell, fifty years ago homosexuality was pretty much illegal in the US. Now we're arguing whether or not they should be married.
    Also, steamrolling the other person's position and calling them an inhumane monster is clearly a great argument, always. Really, great technique.

    You have to draw the line and do so deeply, so that anyone who tries to go "there" finds themselves losing credibility at a rate of about 9.81 m/s^2.

    That's how it works. Some idiot tells tries to tell me it is not fucking insane and evil to apply biblical code partially and for convenience, I tell that person I hope they never experience a happy moment again in their entire lives. Some pusgargling shitsoul tries to tell me that honest-to-goodness human life as recognized in law begins at conception and abortions should always be illegal, I point out that that person fucks his/her mother. Some thoughts ARE inhumane and monstrous once you look at their essences and their logical conclusions.

    That isn't me "steamrolling" anyone (I say that should someone try to sardonically accuse me of "liberal fascism" or something equally retarded). That is me telling people that 2+2 doesn't equal "We must preserve shitty aspects of the world because change is scary!" and if they still try to pull that plebeian anti-liberty shit right in front of me I'll cut them open, shove a fistful of ants into their abdomen and then sew them shut again.

    I'm so perfectly fatigued with and irrevocably devoid of tolerance towards all the anti-human bullshit societies try to pull out of convenience and moral, intellectual and political mediocrity. Banning abortions is fucking evil and letting divorcees remarry while denying gay people the privilege is an idea only a person of low ways and low mind could possibly conceive. End of story, I will not apply any skepticism to my statements, curtains forever and get the cunt out of my way if my lack of tenderness bothers you.

    You can't enslave people, you can't ban abortions and you can't deny gay people the right to marry unless you also try to apply the entire bible to society. We don't live in a universe where I will question the validity and metaphysical quality of these three statements. It is entirely impossible to ever make me entertain the possibility that I am wrong or "hostile to dissent and people who disagree" - others can uselessly waste their time and standing in my eyes debating such topics to their hearts' content, but don't bother with me. My mind is closed on these subjects and I'll spend my life trying to make others follow suit.
    It tickles me to think of just how hard you're going to fail on that last point with your attitude. It will be like watching a man strike a stone with his fist until there is nothing but a ruined stump, while ignoring the hammer right next to him.

    The problem is that the minute I try to be anything less than utterly demanding and ruthless I depreciate my argument.
    I don't care, and the people you're pretending to care about to justify your superiority complex likely don't either.
    Kastanj wrote:
    I can't argue for the fact that a legal human being cannot exist in a bolus of cells - that is instantly humiliating, pathetic...
    Well we wouldn't want you to feel humiliated, now would we?

    Kastanj wrote:
    ...and even counter-productive - it legitimizes the otiose wavering and quivering of the people who are too stupid to agree with me outright, so the minute I've properly argued my point they'll just select another idiotic opinion and demand attention and might even try to stop society from developing by abusing the necessary indulgences society has to extend them.
    They might. They also might not. What is certain is that shouting derisively at them while simultaneously ignoring them won't change anyone's mind—it just makes you look like a fantastic ass.

    I mean, I could give up on teaching my 7th-grade brother math and just tell him he's fucked—and after all, my hypothetical efforts might not matter and he may well be fucked—but that would neglect the real chance that he may actually learn something. You've essentially written off a huge segment of the population as both totally worthless and totally unteachable human beings. I'm sure this makes you feel better, but it does shit to actually change things in the real world.
    Kastanj wrote:
    Instead, the best course of action is to force reality onto people without bothering to worry about concerns of democracy - democracy should simply not have a say on some issues ("But Kastanj can't you see other people have tried that before with horrible resu-" Oh shut the fucking shut up that spiel is neither sagacious, intelligent nor applicable here).
    Like it or not, there are people every bit as influential as yourself who disagree with you. Ignoring them while claiming (whether justified or not) that they shouldn't have any say does nothing to change the reality that they do.
    Kastanj wrote:
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    There comes a point where you have to stop pretending that everyone in the discussion is a reasonable person and start marginalizing the ones that are willing to take the hate stance.

    We had to do it with civil rights, and we're nearing it again with gay rights.

    Slam Dunk, reverberating through the hall. Young children in the crowd start believing in themselves and the antagonist team's nasty coach throws his cap angrily to the floor while the triumphant synth music starts playing.

    It's the mentally average, the emo religious ("Noooo if you force us to recognize reality you'll disrupt the precious LARP our parents grafted onto our spinal cords when we were defenseless waaaah you're a leftistelitistfascist who hates religious people waaaaah politicians come heeeelp!") and the cowards in society who have allowed homophobia to escape the hatred and disgust we subject racism to. Go directly to the politicians and shove your undeniably just and sensible values down their throats instead. Assert reality.
    OptimusZed is right in that pretending everyone is reasonable is foolish—there are no doubt some who will not be swayed by any reasonable argument. Where you go wrong is in assuming everyone who disagrees with you falls into this camp. It's also not a helpful attitude, as your ridiculous verbal flailing only serves to lignify the minds of the (somewhat) reasonable people who disagree with you. You're basically trying to be the liberal equivalent of the Westboro Baptist Church. Those clowns have done more to scare semi-reasonable people away from their particular brand of insanity than they have done to convert others to their views, and your idiotic high-horse bullshit will have precisely the same effect in the opposite direction.

    There may in fact be a point beyond which engaging with a particular individual or group only serves to give their insanity further exposure, but it is abundantly clear that the entirety of the population who even wavers on the subject of religiosity or gay rights does not fall into this camp. There are plenty of people out there who need to be—and who can be—persuaded, and ignoring them only helps the other side.

    CycloneRanger on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    There comes a point where you have to stop pretending that everyone in the discussion is a reasonable person and start marginalizing the ones that are willing to take the hate stance.

    We had to do it with civil rights, and we're nearing it again with gay rights.

    Yes, but the way to do it is not to embrace the ridiculous idea that religion must be binary.
    I never said it was.

    Kastanj is, and it looked like you were trying to defend him to me. I do agree that there are certain things that are equivocally good or evil, trying to tie that into a specific religion seems to be working at cross purposes to what we really want.
    Calling people out for anything other than open bigotry is counter-productive in this sort of thing. But so is tiptoeing around the fact that such bigotry is largely localized to certain segments of the religious community. I don't think "you're a Christian, that makes you an asshole" is a particularly productive way to approach this, but neither is "you're a Christian, and that's why you're an asshole, so I'm going to let you keep talking and pretend it's better than just being a regular bigot."

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • Ethan SmithEthan Smith Origin name: Beart4to Arlington, VARegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    "But Kastanj can't you see other people have tried that before with horrible resu-" Oh shut the fucking shut up that spiel is neither sagacious, intelligent nor applicable here).

    I completely agreed with you up to here. It's rather silly to try to assert the opinions of the minority onto a majority without a period of time of getting the majority used to the idea. Yes, I agree that human rights aren't the sort of thing that we should allow the mob absolute control, but taking societal issues and putting that in the hands of the elite is taking a road just as bad as putting them entirely in the hands of the uneducated plebes.

    Ethan Smith on
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2009
    "I don't care, and the people you're pretending to care about to justify your superiority complex likely don't either."

    It's not a complex, it's sheer superiority. I cannot be equal to a person who for some reason thinks bestiality should not be punished by death while still stating that the bible's words on gay people should affect society and church business. That person is by default stupider than me and less concerned about reality.

    "What is certain is that shouting derisively at them while simultaneously ignoring them won't change anyone's mind—it just makes you look like a fantastic ass."

    No, having to justify my assertion that 2+2=4 makes me look like a fantastic ass. There is no reason to explain or justify why abortions cannot be made illegal.

    "I mean, I could give up on teaching my 7th-grade brother math and just tell him he's fucked—and after all, my hypothetical efforts might not matter and he may well be fucked—but that would neglect the real chance that he may actually learn something. "

    The reasoning I use for my positions is axiomatic. If your brother thinks 2 and 3 are interchangeable, then being all noble and trying to make him see the light just spreads the idiocy. Your analogy sucks.

    "I'm sure this makes you feel better, but it does shit to actually change things in the real world."

    This presumes that society can only change through democracy. It can also change by completely ignoring dissenters who have no connection to reality and heaping opprobrium on and marginalizing stupid people.

    "Ignoring them while claiming (whether justified or not) that they shouldn't have any say does nothing to change the reality that they do."

    I am saying that democracy should be limited to disputable topics, thus keeping the lumpen, the anti-secular and the emotional from affecting the workings of government. That changes reality plenty.

    " It's also not a helpful attitude, as your ridiculous verbal flailing only serves to lignify the minds of the (somewhat) reasonable people who disagree with you. "

    Explain how you can be reasonable and still think that legal life begins at conception or that the bible is an infallible document that can be applied selectively by Christians.

    "There may in fact be a point beyond which engaging with a particular individual or group only serves to give their insanity further exposure"

    It gives them more than exposure - it also gives them an undeserved recognition as equals on the democratic stage.

    "It's rather silly to try to assert the opinions of the minority onto a majority without a period of time of getting the majority used to the idea. Yes, I agree that human rights aren't the sort of thing that we should allow the mob absolute control, but taking societal issues and putting that in the hands of the elite is taking a road just as bad as putting them entirely in the hands of the uneducated plebes."

    "Elite"? Not being dumb because of environmental determinism or likewise makes you "elite"? I'm talking about destroying all chances of any politician ever being capable of taking away liberties even if 100 % of the population demands it. A constitution is a good idea, it just needs to include more axioms that can be derived from reality, in order to protect women or gay people from the sickening and natalist ideation that exists in religions everywhere.

    Kastanj on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • SparvySparvy Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kastanj, you do know you dont come across as a resonable person in any shape or form right? I mean, you dont seem to have really thought through any of your arguments what so ever. If I would be totally honest you just look like someone who have read every single one of your arguments somewhere else and screamed "THIS IS THE TRUTH!" without ever actually considering the points being made. You are almost on double-think level here.

    And saying "All my points are so obvious I dont need to explain them" sounds more like the crazy version of "I dont know what the fuck I am talking about, but I am still superior, my momma says so!"

    Sparvy on
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2009
    "I mean, you dont seem to have really thought through any of your arguments what so ever."

    That's because I can't. They're just there. There is proof that 1+1=2 but I'm not interested in doing all that shit again considering so many thinkers have already done us the favor.

    Kastanj on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Ethan SmithEthan Smith Origin name: Beart4to Arlington, VARegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    "Elite"? Not being dumb because of environmental determinism or likewise makes you "elite"? I'm talking about destroying all chances of any politician ever being capable of taking away liberties even if 100 % of the population demands it. A constitution is a good idea, it just needs to include more axioms that can be derived from reality, in order to protect women or gay people from the sickening and natalist ideation that exists in religions everywhere.

    No human has the right to be killed.
    Ergo you can't have abortions. I mean, why you bitching, this is just me defending human rights, you can't take that away from those children, no matter whether or not you have a majority behind you, that would be TERRIBLE and would be the unwashed masses putting their opinions on us.

    Ethan Smith on
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I think we use "human" as shorthand for "sentient" far too often. I want to incorporate alien rights into our charters hundreds of years ahead of us needing them.

    electricitylikesme on
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2009
    "Elite"? Not being dumb because of environmental determinism or likewise makes you "elite"? I'm talking about destroying all chances of any politician ever being capable of taking away liberties even if 100 % of the population demands it. A constitution is a good idea, it just needs to include more axioms that can be derived from reality, in order to protect women or gay people from the sickening and natalist ideation that exists in religions everywhere.

    No human has the right to be killed.
    Ergo you can't have abortions. I mean, why you bitching, this is just me defending human rights, you can't take that away from those children, no matter whether or not you have a majority behind you, that would be TERRIBLE and would be the unwashed masses putting their opinions on us.

    But a human existence, a human individual, cannot exist in a fetus with a brain the size, consistency and chemical sophistication of a raw egg.

    Wow. I say "I don't think it's good to make human rights subject to democracy" and your idea of turning my position against me is to say that a little tumor that has gestated for two weeks is a human, therefore I'm stuck in a corner? I am not impressed.

    Kastanj on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Modern ManModern Man Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    I'm not allowed to discuss the intellectually empty and completely soulless manner in which the Catholic church interprets its text because I am not a Catholic.
    You're allowed to blather on about the Catholic Church all you want, but your opinion is pretty much irrelevant when it comes to the question of how they interpret their doctrines. Why do you think any Catholic would care what a non-Catholic thought about their religious dogma?

    No one is trying to tell secular Swedes what their social laws should be like when it comes to abortion and gay marriage. So, other than your self-righteous know-it-allism what gives you the right to demand that Irish Catholics tug their forelock and adopt your laws?

    Modern Man on
    Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
    Rigorous Scholarship

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I think we use "human" as shorthand for "sentient" far too often. I want to incorporate alien rights into our charters hundreds of years ahead of us needing them.
    You can't give the aliens rights! What if they want to run for office? Your whole civilization will tear itself down from the inside in one generation the first time you elect a bla... alien.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Modern Man wrote: »
    Kastanj wrote: »
    I'm not allowed to discuss the intellectually empty and completely soulless manner in which the Catholic church interprets its text because I am not a Catholic.
    You're allowed to blather on about the Catholic Church all you want, but your opinion is pretty much irrelevant when it comes to the question of how they interpret their doctrines. Why do you think any Catholic would care what a non-Catholic thought about their religious dogma?

    No one is trying to tell secular Swedes what their social laws should be like when it comes to abortion and gay marriage. So, other than your self-righteous know-it-allism what gives you the right to demand that Irish Catholics tug their forelock and adopt your laws?

    Yes they are. Notably catholics. We just don't listen because their basis has about as much relevance to reality as a conspiracy theorist. Ironically they feel the same way about us.

    It's like you and homosexuals.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Modern ManModern Man Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    That's how it works. Some idiot tells tries to tell me it is not fucking insane and evil to apply biblical code partially and for convenience, I tell that person I hope they never experience a happy moment again in their entire lives.
    And most people roll their eyes at you and laugh at you behind your back when you pull crap like that. But you're so self-absorbed, you have no idea how dumb and fanatical you look.
    That isn't me "steamrolling" anyone (I say that should someone try to sardonically accuse me of "liberal fascism" or something equally retarded). That is me telling people that 2+2 doesn't equal "We must preserve shitty aspects of the world because change is scary!" and if they still try to pull that plebeian anti-liberty shit right in front of me I'll cut them open, shove a fistful of ants into their abdomen and then sew them shut again.
    I love internet keyboard commandos going on about how tough they are. And physical threats in response to differing ideas is the hallmark of a fascist.
    You can't enslave people, you can't ban abortions and you can't deny gay people the right to marry unless you also try to apply the entire bible to society.
    The first concept has nothing to do with the other two. But you'll never understand why, because your view of the world is so stunted.
    It is entirely impossible to ever make me entertain the possibility that I am wrong or "hostile to dissent and people who disagree" - others can uselessly waste their time and standing in my eyes debating such topics to their hearts' content, but don't bother with me. My mind is closed on these subjects and I'll spend my life trying to make others follow suit.
    Snort. You are so precious. You're like some parody of a self-righteous, parochial socialist. Don't ever stop being you- the rest of us need someone to laugh at.

    Modern Man on
    Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
    Rigorous Scholarship

  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2009
    "your opinion is pretty much irrelevant when it comes to the question of how they interpret their doctrines."

    No. Never. Not at all. In fact, I'm probably just as capable or even more capable of finding contradictions in ye olde bible. For example. Should men with long hair be banned from entering churches because the bible says they suck? Should churches not let gay people marry because the bible says they suck?

    Okay, hotshot, now how can you say the bible has any weight on the second question but not the first? I mean, do you instantly gain the capability to somehow explain such blatant hypocrisy and inconsistency because you're a catholic? Just stop insulting my intelligence - logic is logic even if I haven't joined some club.

    "Why do you think any Catholic would care what a non-Catholic thought about their religious dogma?"

    They don't really have to care one fuck - since I know that they are already wrong and it would be shameful for me to try and convince them otherwise, I'll just tell people to dislike them for their homophobia and pressure politicians to ram my decent and righteous values down their throats forever, so that they have a choice between discomfort and frustration or adaptation.

    "No one is trying to tell secular Swedes what their social laws should be like when it comes to abortion and gay marriage."

    We wouldn't listen, of course, since banning abortions is really really stupid and evil and gay marriage should be pretty fucking uncontroversial considering catholics are allowed to gamble and shit and still get married. Irish values on these topics are stupid, logically inconsistent and bad, and the Swedish values are not. Therefore, we can tell the Irish what to do regarding gay marriage and abortions but not the other way around - because the world isn't completely relativist yet despite stubborn attempts to make it so.

    "And physical threats in response to differing ideas is the hallmark of a fascist."

    When a person is telling me society should not be organized around equal rights and woman are no more valuable than a McNugget because their religion tells them there is something precious and magical about a lump of matter three weeks into gestation, they are already fascists and they have already effectively threatened the life of my mother and female compatriots. I respond in kind.

    "The first concept has nothing to do with the other two. "

    They're all axiomatically true and they are all stupid to discuss considering how much we know about the reality around us.

    Kastanj on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • SparvySparvy Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    "your opinion is pretty much irrelevant when it comes to the question of how they interpret their doctrines."

    No. Never. Not at all. In fact, I'm probably just as capable or even more capable of finding contradictions in ye olde bible. For example. Should men with long hair be banned from entering churches because the bible says they suck? Should churches not let gay people marry because the bible says they suck?

    Okay, hotshot, now how can you say the bible has any weight on the second question but not the first? I mean, do you instantly gain the capability to somehow explain such blatant hypocrisy and inconsistency because you're a catholic? Just stop insulting my intelligence - logic is logic even if I haven't joined some club.

    "Why do you think any Catholic would care what a non-Catholic thought about their religious dogma?"

    They don't really have to care one fuck - since I know that they are already wrong and it would be shameful for me to try and convince them otherwise, I'll just tell people to dislike them for their homophobia and pressure politicians to ram my decent and righteous values down their throats forever, so that they have a choice between discomfort and frustration or adaptation.

    "No one is trying to tell secular Swedes what their social laws should be like when it comes to abortion and gay marriage."

    We wouldn't listen, of course, since banning abortions is really really stupid and evil and gay marriage should be pretty fucking uncontroversial considering catholics are allowed to gamble and shit and still get married. Irish values on these topics are stupid, logically inconsistent and bad, and the Swedish values are not. Therefore, we can tell the Irish what to do regarding gay marriage and abortions but not the other way around - because the world isn't completely relativist yet despite stubborn attempts to make it so.

    "And physical threats in response to differing ideas is the hallmark of a fascist."

    When a person is telling me society should not be organized around equal rights and woman are no more valuable than a McNugget because their religion tells them there is something precious and magical about a lump of matter three weeks into gestation, they are already fascists and they have already effectively threatened the life of my mother and female compatriots. I respond in kind.

    "The first concept has nothing to do with the other two. "

    They're all axiomatically true and they are all stupid to discuss considering how much we know about the reality around us.
    Please dont ever equate yourself with all swedes, it makes me sick. And please for the love of god understand what the fuck you are talking about before going on a crusade.

    Sparvy on
Sign In or Register to comment.