Support NeoGAF

[ScientificNinja]

I told her that I didn't buy that she was saying those things just because she thought I wanted to hear them because I don't think anyone could say something like that without meaning it.

I would've believed her. Some people are just like that.

 

[God's Hand]

I read the original post and won't even read the replies. If it's such a big deal that the bitch likes George W. Bush, then you have bigger issues to worry about. I assure you GWB won't come up during casual talking, dinner or sex.

Or get a boyfriend. They all seem to be democratic.

 

[Dan]

Got rid of her? I give it at least two more drama filled interactions.

For the sake of this thread, I sure hope so!

JC10001 - Good on you for being upfront and whatnot. Get it done now and forego even worse drama later.

 

[Baron Aloha]

pm me, if necessary

Heh, me too!

 

[Socreges]

I read the original post and won't even read the replies. If it's such a big deal that the bitch likes George W. Bush, then you have bigger issues to worry about. I assure you GWB won't come up during casual talking, dinner or sex.

Or get a boyfriend. They all seem to be democratic.

Haha, I wonder where your allegiance lies.

 

[XS+]

What a bloody absurd generalisation.



You've simplified some of the most complex dilemmas of our time into black and white options; a couple of punchlines that don't even come close to adequately addressing any of the issues.

If there's one constant you can be assured of, it's that everyone will disagree on these issues. Where do you draw the line? Unless you're looking forward to living an unpleasant, cloistered, antisocial life away from everyone who remotely disagrees with your beliefs, I'd suggest that you'd be mad not to reconcile yourself with the people you disagree with.

Eh? I've simplified nothing. Sometimes there are only two sides: right/wrong -- black/white. There is no dilemma in the gay rights issue. Nor is there any in the support of war in Iraq. You either support the insanity that Bush has prosecuted or you don't. You accept that the American people were duped by Bush and his acolytes or you don't.

You're right -- we will always disagree with others. I will always disagree with those who believe it is their right to marry because they're heterosexual. As well, I will always disagree with those who believe war is the only recourse.

 

[Loki]

I would've believed her. Some people are just like that.

Eh, I dunno. Perhaps in some cases, but I doubt that's true in this specific instance. Mostly because something like "fucking fags" doesn't just happen to fall out of someone's mouth when they're trying to "make an impression" by being a "yes man" (or woman). If she had just stated her disagreement with gay marriage, then maybe you'd be justified in giving her a pass until you had further evidence-- but, like I noted in my post, "fucking fag" (or "fucking nigger/spic/kike" or whatever) is not something that just pops out unless a person harbors that sentiment. And that kind of sentiment-- in both its content and intensity-- is just not something I think anyone should defend.


I'm just saying that a normal person wouldn't have such language on the tip of their tongue.

 

[ScientificNinja]

Eh? I've simplified nothing. Sometimes there are only two sides: right/wrong -- black/white.

That's monstrously short-sighted. On the gay rights issue alone, you've skipped past what marriage potentially means to different people, what its purpose is, how it is influenced by religion and law, how it functions within the policy of preserving life and perpetuating the species...

 

[Dan]

(or "fucking nigger/spic/kike" or whatever)

Not to derail anything, but I have never heard that word before. Who is that offensive to?

I wouldn't believe her story about that being what JC10001 wanted to hear either. I mean, if that's what she had been trying to do, who jumps that far into it? With such a tiny hint at what your position might be, that's a huge jump to take. There was no testing the waters there. Even if her story is true, that would only point to other crazy issues she might have.

 

[way more]

Not to derail anything, but I have never heard that word before. Who is that offensive to?

I wouldn't believe her story about that being what JC10001 wanted to hear either. I mean, if that's what she had been trying to do, who jumps that far into it? With such a tiny hint at what your position might be, that's a huge jump to take. There was no testing the waters there. Even if her story is true, that would only point to other crazy issues she might have.

Its offensive to Jews. I just heard it this year also, and I'm 21, and half Jewish!

Maybe she was joking?

 

[Mike Works]

I often find having a certain aspect that you and your girlfriend/fling are on opposite sides of helps things, be it politics, sports teams, religion, etc.

It can make the sex a lot more fun.

Just think of it as fucking a Republican (up the ass, if need be).

I swear to God, if I ever meet a hot Leafs or Avalanche fan in Vancouver..

Haha, I wonder where your allegiance lies.

:lol

 

[The Shadow]

I just got off the phone with her.

Things started off sweet and nice but got ugly really quick.

I was just as honest as I could be with her. After exchanging pleasantries I told her that I wanted to talk about something she said last night. I laid everything out...what she said that bothered me, how I didn't agree, how I was looking for something long term, and how I thought it was best if we didn't see each other in a bf/gf sort of way anymore.

Then she told me that she said all that stuff because she liked me and she thought it's what I wanted to hear. I asked her what made her think that and she said that it was my reaction to the news (where I said I was surprised). I told her that I didn't mean it that way and that my surprise was more "relief" than "disbelief". I told her that I didn't buy that she was saying those things just because she thought I wanted to hear them because I don't think anyone could say something like that without meaning it.

Then it got ugly. "Why do you even care?", she replied. *insert curse words and derogatory remarks here* She didn't even sound like the same person.

I told her that was enough. I told her I wouldn't call her anymore since it's obvious that there was no way to salvage some kind of friendship out of this and its obvious that she doesn't have any class. I hung the phone up on her. The end.

Yikes...Sounds like she's got a hair trigger on the temper. I'm thinking this is for the best. You're better off without as the drama is strong in this one.

 

[XS+]

That's monstrously short-sighted. On the gay rights issue alone, you've skipped past what marriage potentially means to different people, what its purpose is, how it is influenced by religion and law, how it functions within the policy of preserving life and perpetuating the species...

Huh? Marriage is an agreement between two consenting adults who wish to have their union recognized under law. That some people, fueled by the hysteria of religious doctrine, oppose government sanctioned marriage between two law-abiding adults is NOT my problem. Marriage can mean many things to different people, a point well taken. However, marriage should not be limited to just heterosexuals because a vocal minority of this nation clings to outmoded dogma that prevents them from tolerating this step towards a progressive and inclusive society. Lastly, I don't see what the contract of marriage has to do with "preserving life and pertuating the species."

 

[ScientificNinja]

Huh? Marriage is an agreement between two consenting adults who wish to have their union recognized under law.

I'll just stop you right there because it's obvious that what you've said is so deeply couched in your socio-cultural values that you're not aware of it. Not all cultures are so comparatively wealthy beyond their dreams as to overlook the simple desire to marry in order to have children.

 

[psycho_snake]

I really dont think anyone here has helped the orginal thread maker, its just turning into one of these stupid american politic threads.

 

[adam20]

I haven't posted about any personal issues on GAF since Valentine's Day (some of you may recall that thread). This is partially because not much has happened and partially because I didn't think it was interesting enough to share.

So here's the deal. I was walking my dog last week and I came across this girl walking her dog too. We both had the same kind of dog (yellow lab). We got to talking and we started realizing that we had a lot in common. We just really clicked. I asked her if she was seeing anyone and if she wouldn't mind giving me her number so that I could call her up sometime. She said she wasn't and she told me her number. Luckily it was only a couple digits off from my number so it was easy to remember.

Two days later I gave her a call and asked her if she wanted to go out and she said that she was tired and that she didn't feel like going out but she suggested that I stop by her place (which is only like 2 blocks away from mine). I show up at her place and she invites me in and gives me a tour. The first thing I notice in her living room is a PS2 and GC. I asked her if she lived with her brother and she was like "I get asked that a lot, those are mine." So I'm already thinking to myself:

"attractive?" Check.
"dog lover?" Check.
"gamer too!?!" Check.
"Holy crap...this is the perfect woman for me."

We talked some more and come to find out we both went to the same college too. A this point its starting to get really freaky how much we have in common. I left her house a few hours later and we agreed to go out on Saturday. We went out. Things were great.

I went back to her house last night and then IT happened. The news was on and it mentioned how the supreme court had elected to let the states decide on the gay marriage issue. Then she blurts out "I can't believe they aren't going to do something about that. Those liberals are demoralizing the country. Thank God George Bush is the president. He wants to ammend the constitution."

My heart litterally SANK! Now granted, I do live in an upper-middle class neighborhood where the majority of people are republicans so I shouldn't have been too surprised... but hearing those words come out of her mouth was shocking. A short time later I told her I wasn't feeling well and I headed home.

So I'm thinking about calling her tonight and telling her how I feel about what she said. I want to explain to her that politics is something that I am very passionate about and that I don't think we should take the relationship any further because quite frankly I don't think this is something I could get over... plus I'm sure that at some point I'd have to meet her family and they would make me sick too. Relationships are difficult enough sometimes without having politics get in the way. I just don't see how having a long term relationship with someone who disagrees with me on these issues could ever work out. This girl just might be the female version of Ripclawe.

Is this a good idea, a bad idea? Should I tell her a BS excuse instead of just being totally up front and telling her how I really feel? Thoughts?

you need to be honest with her. dont be like a kid. Honest and open is what you have to be. It is very distrubing people like that exist. The anti gays anti this anti that. Hateful disgusting people so clouded by a few key republican ideals that they dont care bush is ruining the country. Simply they cannot see that way. As according to them a republican's agenda is always right. Politics can be big for me too. It can say a lot about a person and their intelligence. Just the way they think. Here in canada it's like I can tell which friend's of mine would lean more towards being democratic than republican. Or lets just put it more simply... Kerry or Bush. He's smart... I just know he's against bush. Yup checks out. She seems stoned and clueless... I bet she's pro bush? She doesnt even know who bush is! LOL jk. Yup she's pro bush. Anyone else notice this? Of course there are many who were just raised a certain way in america so it's just the way it is.

I dont know how serious I could be in a relationship if my girl's views were opposite of mine. It just says a lot about the person. Who they are. What they believe. What they stand for. If it's non serious I try to just avoid the political discussion all together but that cant always happen. I personally haven't been with someone so far right so it's been fine. Often I can tell what kind of person I am with so it doesn't ever come as a surprise what their stance is on things. The intellectual types usually are my kind of people =). The tolerant understanding people. The ones who know issues and judge in a reasonable logical informed manner.

 

[Lara]

Agreed. True story:


Things were going splendidly with this girl I was dating for a couple of months back when I was 19. She had a slight temper at times, which was somewhat off-putting, but eh, we all have our faults. So one day we're in the local mall, which is in a primarily black neighborhood (Kings Plaza for those in Bklyn.); we were in some girly store that I got reluctantly dragged into-- I think it was Express or some such. Anyway, to make a long story short, we're waiting on line to purchase some clothes, and some black woman-- I'm almost certain in ignorance, but perhaps purposely-- decides to try to cut into the line a couple of people ahead of us. Now, it was near the holidays, and we had been shopping a while, so there was obviously some tension there about just wanting to get the heck out of the mall and go home to relax.


All of a sudden, she just flips the hell out, talking loudly into the air, "f'ing nigger this" and "f'ing nigger that", going on and on (loudly, in a store where there were dozens of black people, mind you, though obviously it's wrong anywhere) about how "these niggers think they can do whatever they want". Needless to say, I was appalled, and pretty much grabbed her by the arm and ushered her out of the store after trying to calm her down verbally. So we get outside the store, and I try to tell her how I felt that those comments were indefensible, though I sorta candy-coated it because she was visibly pissed, and I'm not one for confrontation in public places, and besides, I knew I'd have to be with her for at least another half hour until I dropped her off home. So later that night, when I dropped her off, I told her flat-out that I didn't want to be with someone who harbored such virulent racist sentiment (I didn't use those words, obviously-- she wasn't the brightest bulb ). She started apologizing, saying how she just got caught up in the moment, and how she realizes that not all black people are "like that" etc., but I would have none of it.


Much like the "fag" comments above, it was more the intense nature of the sentiment the specific epithets conveyed than merely fact that she may not like black people. If she had phrased it differently, or had been less insistent/aggressive about vocalizing it in a crowded store (which is just unbecoming, regardless), perhaps I would have had to think about it for more than a split-second. But, to my mind, when "f'ing nigger" flows so readily from someone's mouth-- even when they're angry-- it really betrays a deep hatred and wickedness. Hell, I don't think I'd say that word if I were held up at gunpoint or beaten up by a group of blacks-- it's just not in my nature to do so; being so close to someone who DID do so was unsettling. It never would have worked out.


I imagine I'd have done the same had someone used the word "fag" in such a manner (or in any context, really). Though I personally disagree with homosexuality, I really can't see insulting someone so harshly, and I wouldn't want to be with someone who felt that it was their place to call people "dirty fags" either. It's just a disgusting sentiment; these sorts of comments and intense hatreds spring from a terribly warped mentality.


Crazy world.

Come again? You 'disagree with homosexuality'?

I was agreeing with your post up until the bolded part. Then I saw the irony of it all.

 

[XS+]

I'll just stop you right there because it's obvious that what you've said is so deeply couched in your socio-cultural values that you're not aware of it. Not all cultures are so comparatively wealthy beyond their dreams as to overlook the simple desire to marry in order to have children.

What are you arguing, exactly? We should prevent homosexuals from marrying because it infringes on the rights of heterosexuals to breed? Homosexuals should be prevented from getting married because they won't breed? Well, duh. What are you saying? What I've said is "deeply couched" in my responsibility to promote a progressive society, one where an institution like marriage, however archaic, isn't exclusive to unions of a man and a woman. Why do you get so bent out of shape at the idea of homosexuals marrying? How does that stop you, presumably heterosexual, from marrying? How does it diminish the significance of a marriage between a man and a woman? THIS is why civil discourse between liberals and conservatives turn into heated arguments. You people take these extreme positions, strawmen in tow, disallowing a substantive discussion of the issues.

Not all cultures are so comparatively wealthy beyond their dreams as to overlook the simple desire to marry in order to have children

I still have no idea wtf the above statement means.

 

[Incognito]

This thread is turning into a gold-mine.

 

[nitewulf]

well done jc, she sounded a bit short tempered. just a bit mind you. :lol

 

[Fresh Prince]

I really dont think anyone here has helped the orginal thread maker, its just turning into one of these stupid american politic threads.

Relationship Advice and Political Treads are what OT succeeds at (or more to the point doesn't). It's like a lurker's wet dream come true.

 

[AstroLad]

Relationship Advice and Political Treads are what OT succeeds at (or more to the point doesn't). It's like a lurker's wet dream come true.

I dunno, looks to me like he fixed his problem as well as he could. He said, "hey this bitch calls people 'fucking fags'" and then he more or less kicked her to the curb. Seems like a success to me.

As for the extraneous discussion, well it's a message board, that's usually what happens.

 

[Saturnman]

Wow, so this is the infamous thread I heard about.

I disagree with blue skies myself. I prefer them orange or yellow.

 

[Fresh Prince]

I dunno, looks to me like he fixed his problem as well as he could. He said, "hey this bitch calls people 'fucking fags'" and then he more or less kicked her to the curb. Seems like a success to me.

As for the extraneous discussion, well it's a message board, that's usually what happens.

Sure JC for the most part fixed his problem (unless in true internet fashion something she strats going crazy on him), but agreed it's the little battles and general hit and miss one liners that make this thread go from good to great. XS+ versus the world (or Atomasher and Scientific Ninja) for example.

 

[Musashi Wins!]

Sometimes dating people with different political views even in their 20's can be rough. There's a certain radicalism (whether deserved or not) that can inspire you in that age. I consider myself a "liberal" by default, though I'm no fan of dogmas on either aisle. So I was once very much in love with a girl who was far more leftist than myself. It got to the point where every conversation devolved into feminist power rhetoric, we couldn't eat anywhere because she got more and more strict about vegetarianism, she quit shaving her legs (petty and cultural yes, but repulsive sexually to me). We argued more and more and many times it was simply myself being rebellious to her political tyranny, even when I had sympathies with it. I'd purposely order steaks, smoked cigars, etc. She was turning me into a republican out of resentment. It ended. She's much wiser though still committed now, and I respect her and am wiser myself...but at the time?!?!?!

Anyhow, JC your story makes me sad. It's hard to meet a hot chick who likes dogs and video games.

 

[Loki]

Not to derail anything, but I have never heard that word before. Who is that offensive to?

As noted, it's a slur for Jewish people. Hey, I'm from NY-- we hear everything.

Come again? You 'disagree with homosexuality'?

I was agreeing with your post up until the bolded part. Then I saw the irony of it all.

Yes, I disagree with it. Perhaps that's not the proper term, but you get the idea. My post isn't ironic at all. I "disagree" with many things, not just homosexuality, yet I don't advocate dehumanization and foul treatment of anyone, nor do I even feel the slightest inclination to engage in such behavior (why would I? We're all people, and all people do things that I "disagree" with-- hell, I do things I disagree with ) just because I disagree with homosexuality on a rational level. However, such a tangent is not germane to this topic, though I've elaborated on my beliefs on these matters numerous times in the past with great candor (and at great length), so don't think I'm "dodging" anything.


Let it also be known that I am not opposed to gays gaining the same marital benefits as heterosexuals enjoy. My personal beliefs and my convictions about the role and function of the state are two entirely different things, as they should be for any reasonable person.

 

[miyuru]

Someone against gays is like a racist person to me.

But in this case, fuck her a couple times and ditch.

Edit: I didn't mean, "racist to me" as in, racist towards me!!! I'm not gay, calm down GAF'ers!

 

[Saturnman]

Please rationalize your disagreement, Loki. This is a forum where ideas are exchanged. Don't be shy about it.

Try to do it in 200 words or less or I am not listening.

 

[ZombieSupaStar]

EH use her for a fuck friend


But dont get serious.

 

[Boogie]

Please rationalize your disagreement, Loki. This is a forum where ideas are exchanged. Don't be shy about it.

Try to do it in 200 words or less or I am not listening.

You guys are cruel ;P

 

[Loki]

Please rationalize your disagreement, Loki. This is a forum where ideas are exchanged. Don't be shy about it.

Try to do it in 200 words or less or I am not listening.

Like I said, it's not relevant, so I'll pass. Besides which, anybody who's been on the forum for a while will have already seen my posts on these matters (and that includes you, HAM ). If anybody feels that I'm some closet bigot or homophobe just because I disagree with homosexuality, then that's their right. Fortunately, however, I believe that most people can tell exactly the type of person I am from my posts over the years on this and many other subjects. Or at least anybody who's opinion on me I'd care about (i.e., reasonable people). I'm not in the habit of "proving myself" to other people. I like to discourse, obviously , but if you must know, I've been thinking about getting away from the forum for a good while now (or at least seriously curtailing the amount of time I spend here), and getting involved in what would undoubtedly turn into a multi-page back-and-forth where I waste 10 hours writing 15K words elaborating on my beliefs is not conducive to such a thing.

 

[Lara]

Yes, I disagree with it. Perhaps that's not the proper term, but you get the idea. My post isn't ironic at all. I "disagree" with many things, not just homosexuality, yet I don't advocate dehumanization and foul treatment of anyone, nor do I even feel the slightest inclination to engage in such behavior just because I disagree with homosexuality on a rational level. However, such a tangent is not germane to this topic, though I've elaborated on my beliefs on these matters numerous times in the past with great candor (and at great length), so don't think I'm "dodging" anything.

Huh? Now you disagree with homosexuality on a 'rational level'? The most common disagreement has its source in religion. I'm guessing that you oppose homosexuality as a corollary of your faith? Faith, by definition, is not rational (let me hasten to add: that doesn't make faith 'bad').

I have not suggested that you advocate the dehumanisation or foul treatment of homosexuals. It's unlikely that JC10001's 'perfect girl' wants to chop fags up into little pieces, but JC10001 still finds (rightly, to my mind) her opinions on homosexuality unpalatable. Likewise, I disagree with your statement on homosexuality; and I happened to find it ironic given the nature of the original post.

 

[Saturnman]

Hate the sin, not the sinner. Got it, Loki.

But that's not really rational.

 

[Boogie]

Lara, meet Loki. Loki, Lara. Now you two kids run along and exchange lengthy and verbose posts. Have fun

 

[White Man]

Loki's cool with me, and I've had penises in my mouth. Tolerance works both ways, duders.

 

[Boogie]

Loki's cool with me, and I've had penises in my mouth. Tolerance works both ways, duders.

:lol

That cracked me up for some reason.

 

[Chipopo]

:lol

That cracked me up for some reason.

It was probably the penis in the mouth part.

 

[Incognito]

It was probably the penis in the mouth part.

Damnit, I was just about to say that.

 

[Loki]

Huh? Now you disagree with homosexuality on a 'rational level'? The most common disagreement has its source in religion. I'm guessing that you oppose homosexuality as a corollary of your faith? Faith, by definition, is not rational (let me hasten to add: that doesn't make faith 'bad').

I'm not getting into it. You're new, so I can understand your ignorance. If you like, do a search of my posts for God/faith. Unfortunately, my posts re: homosexuality were on the old forums, but like I said, those who have been here a while have seen me discuss them at length and with as much honesty as I could. Dunno what else to say, really, 'cept that I'll pass.

I have not suggested that you advocate the dehumanisation or foul treatment of homosexuals. It's unlikely that JC10001's 'perfect girl' wants to chop fags up into little pieces, but JC10001 still finds (rightly, to my mind) her opinions on homosexuality unpalatable. Likewise, I disagree with your statement on homosexuality; and I happened to find it ironic given the nature of the original post.

Thing is, I find her expressed opinions and sentiment abhorrent as well, yet I disagree with homosexuality. It's not that I thought she "wanted to chop up gay people into little pieces", but that what she expressed-- in terms of both content and sentiment-- is indefensible on many levels, and I said so. And yes, it is quite proper to view JC's girl's remarks "unpalatable" (to say the least), as I do. But to assert either that I'm some homophobe/bigot (not that you have, I'm just saying), or that disagreement with homosexuality must by nature be irrational is quite naive.


I have rational bases for every thought that I have. Are all my thoughts 100% rational? No, of course not. But that's an impossible standard. All I can point to is that I've lost years of my life on this forum elaborating upon the very rational bases for many of my beliefs (both on this topic and others); if you'd care to, you can do a search of my posts to prove that for yourself, as I realize you're new here. But taking my refusal to get into it now as evidence that my beliefs must be "irrational" (or "non-rational"; i.e., concerned with or informed by aspects/natures of ourselves other than our mind/reason) is pretty irrational itself.


I will not discuss this further.

 

[ScientificNinja]

What are you arguing, exactly? We should prevent homosexuals from marrying because it infringes on the rights of heterosexuals to breed? Homosexuals should be prevented from getting married because they won't breed? Well, duh. What are you saying? What I've said is "deeply couched" in my responsibility to promote a progressive society, one where an institution like marriage, however archaic, isn't exclusive to unions of a man and a woman. Why do you get so bent out of shape at the idea of homosexuals marrying?

Dude, I'm not getting bent out of shape here. I'm just saying you're making an awful lot of assumptions and generalisations here.

How does that stop you, presumably heterosexual, from marrying? How does it diminish the significance of a marriage between a man and a woman? THIS is why civil discourse between liberals and conservatives turn into heated arguments. You people take these extreme positions, strawmen in tow, disallowing a substantive discussion of the issues.

"You people"? What do you mean by "you people"? I try to politely point to the possibility that you're overlooking a few things in your supposedly "progressive" vision for the world and you immediately race to assume I'm trying to exert some form of discursive censorship? I'm raised in a cultural minority, personally, so I'm a very firm believer in equality no matter the cost - which is why I find the lack of foresight in your 'free love! free love for everyone!' a tad jarring. There are some very simple 'devil's advocate' questions one can throw into this discussion to really bring out the true nature of people. Answer me these questions, then - but for the lovey dovey 'I want to spend the rest of my life with you' factor, what on earth is the point of a homosexual marriage? To have children? Some cultures are happy just to be able to have children in a marriage! But wait - homosexuals can always look to adoption and surrogacy, don't they? Should they have as much right to adoption etc as, say, a heterosexual couple who, through some kind of medical misfortune, are unable to conceive? Homosexuals can't have children anyway - why should they be entitled to adopt when it's not something they can do anyway? Isn't it one of those 'life choices'? No? Okay then, should children be raised in an openly homosexual environment? And what does that say of the commodification of children? Do you want your children to be homosexual? No, don't give me that hippy 'I'm happy for them to be whatever they want, just as long as they're healthy' crap - just answer yes or no.


Personally I can't definitively answer any of these questions. I also think that a society that's asking itself these kind of questions has waaaay too much greed and money in its hands. As far as I'm concerned, I'm happy for everyone to do whatever the hell they want, just as long as they leave me in peace. But hey, if you think you've got all the answers, more power to you.

 

[AstroLad]

why should they be entitled to adopt when it's not something they can do anyway?

:lol :lol

Yes, fertility should be the test for adoption. Sorry unable to conceive couples! If you can't do it anyway, God didn't want you to have kids.

It's okay man, Loki can take it from here.

*prepares for novella-length post*

 

[Boogie]

I will not discuss this further.

Pfft, famous last words.

 

[Lara]

I'm not getting into it. You're new, so I can understand your ignorance. If you like, do a search of my posts for God/faith. Unfortunately, my posts re: homosexuality were on the old forums, but like I said, those who have been here a while have seen me discuss them at length and with as much honesty as I could. Dunno what else to say, really, 'cept that I'll pass.






Thing is, I find her expressed opinions and sentiment abhorrent as well, yet I disagree with homosexuality. It's not that I thought she "wanted to chop up gay people into little pieces", but even what she expressed-- in terms of both content and sentiment-- is indefensible on many levels, and I said so. And yes, it is quite proper to view JC's girl's remarks "unpalatable" (to say the least), as I do. But to assert either that I'm some homophobe/bigot (not that you have, I'm just saying), or that disagreement with homosexuality must by nature be irrational is quite naive.


I have rational bases for every thought that I have. Are all my thoughts 100% rational? No, of course not. But that's an impossible standard. All I can point to is that I've lost years of my life on this forum elaborating upon the very rational bases for many of my beliefs (both on this topic and others); if you'd care to, you can do a search of my posts to prove that for yourself, as I realize you're new here. But taking my refusal to get into it now as evidence that my beliefs must be "irrational" (or "non-rational"; i.e., based on aspects/natures of ourselves other than our mind/reason) is pretty irrational itself.


I will not discuss this further.

Can you just answer one question for me?

Is your 'disagreement' with homosexuality based on your chosen faith?


N.B. I'm not sure that I agree with your definition of rationality, but that's another issue.

 

[Saturnman]

I know Loki, Lara, I can pretend to be him and try to answer all your questions for him. It should be fun.

 

[Boogie]

I know Loki, Lara, I can pretend to be him and try to answer all your questions for him. It should be fun.

I like this idea. Go at it.

 

[White Man]

Pfft, famous last words.

True indeed.

People seem to make the mistake that there's only ONE system of rational thought. This is incorrect. I've been an agnostic since I was around 11 or so. Loki has been religious his whole life. Naturally, we have different conceptions of what rationality is. If things such as religion, and faith are rational in his system, then that's the way things go. My systems of rationality, based off of science and art, are probably equally questionable to him. This doesn't stop us from having articulate and interesting conversations. We are two kids from different worlds, and you know what? There's 6 billion different world's out there. Rationality is subjective. Only once you realise this will your mind truly be open.

 

[Lara]

I'm not sure if you should speak for Loki. He may pop a blood vessel or something....

True indeed.

People seem to make the mistake that there's only ONE system of rational thought. This is incorrect. I've been an agnostic since I was around 11 or so. Loki has been religious his whole life. Naturally, we have different conceptions of what rationality is. If things such as religion, and faith are rational in his system, then that's the way things go. My systems of rationality, based off of science and art, are probably equally questionable to him. This doesn't stop us from having articulate and interesting conversations. We are two kids from different worlds, and you know what? There's 6 billion different world's out there. Rationality is subjective. Only once you realise this will your mind truly be open.

Certainly, there can be disagreement about what rational thought really is. But Loki's definition (non-rational = 'based on aspects/natures of ourselves other than our mind/reason') seems to be noticeably flawed.

 

[Saturnman]

That sounds like a no, Lara.

I can't risk it making an impression of Loki for nothing. It takes quite a bit of time and words to get into that character.

Maybe next time then.

 

[ScientificNinja]

But Loki's definition (non-rational = 'based on aspects/natures of ourselves other than our mind/reason') seems to be noticeably flawed.

Really? I just thought it was a cute little pigeonhole for post-modern thought...

 

[White Man]

Certainly, there can be disagreement about what rational thought really is. But Loki's definition (non-rational = 'based on aspects/natures of ourselves other than our mind/reason') seems to be noticeably flawed.

Rational thought is devoid of all emotional bias, personal wants and needs, and considers all factors presented as potentially relevant. Rational thought is a very personal thing, and what's 'rational' to one will not be the same to another. As long as Loki's words are true to what he's said in the past, then he is being rational.

Rationality is often confused with the philosophical school of logic, but they are NOT the same.