Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 124

Thread: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

  1. #41
    Aexodus's Avatar Persuasion>Coercion
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NI
    Posts
    8,764
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    The gay marriage argument that marriage has already made the transition to being between two 'people', rather than between a Mann and a woman. Also, since marriage is mainly a religious sacrament carried out by Priests in religious institutions, the government has no right to decide what goes on in those institutions therefore gay marriage has no legislative mandate IMO.

    And that's not to mention that homosexuality goes against the biological imperative of humans, yet you're happy mentioning the biological aspect to racism. Not saying that homosexuality should be by any means illegal, but that it isn't especially to be encouraged given that most people aren't born gay, their bodies are literally made for heterosexual union with the aim of having children. Homosexuality puts a society at a direct disadvantage to other societies, take Europe, one of the most pro-gay continents in the world, with a fertility rate less than half of some of the migrant countries entering it.
    Last edited by Aexodus; February 21, 2018 at 06:23 PM. Reason: marriage doesnt go against human nature :P
    Patronised by Pontifex Maximus
    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    The trick is to never be honest. That's what this social phenomenon is engineering: publicly conform, or else.

  2. #42
    Elfdude's Avatar Tribunus
    Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    7,335

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism



    Oh god, appealing to biology as a justification for why people aren't born gay. I'm sorry guy but you're barking up the wrong tree. SLITRK6, TSHR, XQ28, and some other 20 or so genes which are linked to homosexuality, also the variants which seem to lead to homosexuality are social promoters which increase one's ability to interact successfully with others, this of course isn't talking about epigenetics which there's dozens of factors I could mention, nor does it talk about in-utero conditions of the foetus. Which is to say, there's literally hundreds of biological pathways which we've identified which can lead to gayness. Now this isn't even talking about social-cultural effects of which we know there's many for example women who are sexually assaulted, much more likely to avoid sexual contact with men. There also seems to be a phenomena what in the absence of cultural barriers and stigmas associated with the act most have little or no inhibition with same sex coupling (although ipso-facto this doesn't mean they're gay) in fact genetically completely gay or completely straight seems to be the outliers whereas the vast majority of us benefit from the gay genes.

  3. #43
    Sir Adrian's Avatar the Imperishable
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nehekhara
    Posts
    17,363

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Reproduction (the purpose of marriage) goes against human instinct? What?


    Quote Originally Posted by Elfdude View Post
    This just in, romans weren't racist because their racism revolved around different qualifiers besides colorism. Completely invalidating 21st century politics. Tune in next time to hear concession speech of the DNC.

    Also, racism is biologically inevitable thus our ability to understand its deleterious effects intellectually demands no action. Also blacks are to blame for slavery and catholics are to blame for anti-semitism.

    Finally, how dare people take pride in their lifestyles and try to marry the person they love.

    This just in, moving the goal post and non-sequiturs do not constitute a counter-argument.


    You keep saying racism is biological but you bring nothing to back that up aside for "because I said so".

    Quote Originally Posted by Elfdude View Post
    SLITRK6, TSHR, XQ28, and some other 20 or so genes which are linked to homosexuality
    You sure about that, because hre is what those genes really do?

    SLITRK6

    This gene encodes a member of the SLITRK protein family. Members of this family are integral membrane proteins that are characterized by two N-terminal leucine-rich repeat (LRR) domains and a C-terminal region that shares homology with trk neurotrophin receptors. This protein functions as a regulator of neurite outgrowth required for normal hearing and vision. Mutations in this gene are a cause of myopia and deafness. [provided by RefSeq, Dec 2014]
    TSHR

    The protein encoded by this gene is a membrane protein and a major controller of thyroid cell metabolism. The encoded protein is a receptor for thyrothropin and thyrostimulin, and its activity is mediated by adenylate cyclase. Defects in this gene are a cause of several types of hyperthyroidism. Three transcript variants encoding different isoforms have been found for this gene. [provided by RefSeq, Dec 2008]

    As for XQ28 there was one guy in 1995 who said that it THE gene responsible for sexual orientation. Subsequent studies have found out that it is not true with each study diminishing its role. Here's what the latest study found out about it

    We have extended our analysis of the role of the long arm of the X chromosome (Xq28) in sexual orientation by DNA linkage analyses of two newly ascertained series of families that contained either two gay brothers or two lesbian sisters as well as heterosexual siblings. Linkage between the Xq28 markers and sexual orientation was detected for the gay male families but not for the lesbian families or for families that failed to meet defined inclusion criteria for the study of sex-linked sexual orientation. Our results corroborate the previously reported linkage between Xq28 and male homosexuality in selected kinships and suggest that this region contains a locus that influences individual variations in sexual orientation in men but not in women.
    It went from being THE cause to not even the most significant contributing factor.
    Last edited by Sir Adrian; February 21, 2018 at 06:28 PM.
    Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!


  4. #44
    Aexodus's Avatar Persuasion>Coercion
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NI
    Posts
    8,764
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default : Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Some people are born gay and have no way of changing that, I never ruled that out in my post.

    Which is to say, there's literally hundreds of biological pathways which we've identified which can lead to gayness.
    Yes there are, with gayness being a biological dead-end with no reproductive advantage. People can be gay if they want, but it's not an especially positive thing.

    same sex coupling (although ipso-facto this doesn't mean they're gay)
    Oh so 'no homo' is an actual thing now

    SLITRK6, TSHR, XQ28, and some other 20 or so genes which are linked to homosexuality, also the variants which seem to lead to homosexuality are social promoters which increase one's ab
    And there are genes for other developmental disorders too. What's your point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Settra View Post
    Reproduction (the purpose of marriage) goes against human instinct? What?
    Typo edited
    Last edited by Abdülmecid I; February 22, 2018 at 04:21 AM. Reason: Consecutive posts merged.
    Patronised by Pontifex Maximus
    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    The trick is to never be honest. That's what this social phenomenon is engineering: publicly conform, or else.

  5. #45

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    The gay marriage argument that marriage has already made the transition to being between two 'people', rather than between a Mann and a woman. Also, since marriage is mainly a religious sacrament carried out by Priests in religious institutions, the government has no right to decide what goes on in those institutions therefore gay marriage has no legislative mandate IMO.
    Religion can't claim ownership of the term "marriage" and neither can they or should they influence how the legal aspects of marriage are applied to citizens of any given state.

    And that's not to mention that homosexuality goes against the biological imperative of humans, yet you're happy mentioning the biological aspect to racism. Not saying that homosexuality should be by any means illegal, but that it isn't especially to be encouraged given that most people aren't born gay, their bodies are literally made for heterosexual union with the aim of having children. Homosexuality puts a society at a direct disadvantage to other societies, take Europe, one of the most pro-gay continents in the world, with a fertility rate less than half of some of the migrant countries entering it.
    This makes no sense. Both homosexuality and discrimination is observed in nature by animals. While racism is largely a social construct, animals do discriminate and many exhibit the desire to mate only with those who exhibit similar genes to them. There's nothing wrong with it, they are animals after all. Either way, the idea that something is "wrong" because it's unnatural is a primitive anarchism.

  6. #46
    Elfdude's Avatar Tribunus
    Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    7,335

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Quote Originally Posted by Settra View Post
    Reproduction (the purpose of marriage) goes against human instinct? What?
    Since when was reproduction the purpose of marriage?

    Quote Originally Posted by Settra View Post
    This just in, moving the goal post and non-sequiturs do not constitute a counter-argument.
    This just in, settra once again doesn't understand what sequitur means.

    Quote Originally Posted by Settra View Post
    You keep saying racism is biological but you bring nothing to back that up aside for "because I said so".
    In group bias is a pretty basic concept. I wouldn't say that it's an absolute in biology in that all biological organisms feature it but that it's a cognitive behavior which is observed in all humanity. The biological explanation for it is that we're safe with that which we're familiar with and thus will choose familiarity over something which is better to reduce risk. Luckily humans aren't completely beholden to their instincts (just mostly so) and can think their way out of a paper bag enough to realize the folly in this mindset. You always pick the oddest things to quibble with.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism

    Note, this applies to anything, i.e. I'm familiar with myself, I'm familiar with the gender of being a man, I'm familiar with western european cultural norms, I'm familiar with christian thought and theology, I'm familiar with white skin tone, I'm familiar with european face shapes, I'm familiar with western cuisine, I'm familiar with cars which have two lights and four wheels, I'm familiar with jugs or cartons and not bags, I'm familiar with water in bottles and not cans, so on and so forth. These lead to sentiments which give us a sense of cognitive dissonance initially upon violating these familiarities, the sense of stepping into the unknown so to speak. This sense quickly goes away but can also be drastically reinforced by negative stimuli. Now there's definitely points in your development where this doesn't influence you quite as much, from about 0-2 you'll eat anything that you're given (food or not), after that it becomes very difficult to expose one to new foods (well relatively difficult, it's still pretty easy tbh but it's different than blind acceptance) this is traced to a cognitive development which starts between 2-4 which leads to massive reordering of your neurons. Your brain (triggered by hormonal activation) makes the call that what you need less of is plasticity and what you need more of is differentiating that which you already know. You lose the ability to see differences in facial structure, you lose the ability to hear differences in tone, you lose the ability to make certain sounds, in exchange for being able to be more precise with that which you're familiar with.

    It's quite natural.

    As to whether society was dominated by power holders in the past this is another obvious one. In the absence of society or rule of law the rule is rule of force, those who possess the greatest ability to rule through force accrue the greatest amounts of resources leading to a snowball effect. Eventually they're deposed and replaced by new tyrants or they develop select alliances sharing their power and resources with the minimum number to preserve their resource dominance, over time this process is repeated in a top down way, as societies grow more prosperous the sharing of resources becomes more and more common which reduces the incentive for obedience and deference in turn leading to a power struggle where the many depose the few. We have strong evidence all societies have followed this process.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    Some people are born gay and have no way of changing that, I never ruled that out in my post.
    "Their bodies are made" is an appeal to biological determinism. But no matter, if you vacate your claim I'm satisfied either way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    Yes there are, with gayness being a biological dead-end with no reproductive advantage. People can be gay if they want, but it's not an especially positive thing.
    Errm, you clearly don't understand biology. Reproductive success is meaningless to the individual. Reproductive success is about the success of genes within a lineage. It can be far more successful for you to help your sister rear her 10 very healthy children than to have children of your own and can result in more of your genes ending up in the future genetic pool. This is probably why older folks stop being reproductive (in combination with effects of teratogens on eggs) but still live another 40+ years. Grandparents can dramatically help the success of their grandchildren by being around despite having no further ability to contribute individually in a direct fashion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    Oh so 'no homo' is an actual thing now
    I don't know what you refer to. You should check out the kinsey reports, I mean they're outdated as but they give a much more thorough perspective of male/male sex and the frequency of it even within the most repressed societies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    And there are genes for other developmental disorders too.
    Whoops. Predictable response. These genes are social promoters. Those who have them are more successful socially, only some of those who have them become gay, the vast majority are far more likely to reproduce, have higher social IQ's and perform better in society. Genetic disorders have negative or neutral consequences, the only negative consequence these seem to have is that in combination with other factors you may become homosexual. On the other hand, not having them is shown to be a risk factor for numerous things including violence, lack of empathy, antisociality and failure. If you think antisocial folks are more successful at spreading their genes you're extremely mistaken.

  7. #47

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Quote Originally Posted by Elfdude View Post
    These genes are social promoters. Those who have them are more successful socially, only some of those who have them become gay, the vast majority are far more likely to reproduce, have higher social IQ's and perform better in society.
    Where did you come up with this? TSHR mutations are associated with Grave's disease. This is mentioned in the study that found the association with male homosexuality.

    EDIT: May as well post the relevant section...

    On chromosome 14, TSHR (thyroid stimulating hormone receptor) spans the region around our most significant SNP (rs1035144, p = 4.7 × 10−7), and includes a cluster of SNPs with association p < 10−5 in intron 1. TSHR encodes a G protein-coupled transmembrane receptor for thyrothropin (thyroid stimulating hormone) and thyrostimulin, manifests some constitutive activity (i.e., ligand independent), and is a major controller of thyroid cell metabolism36,37,38. While the main tissue of interest and expression for TSHR is the thyroid gland, TSHR is expressed in other tissues including brain especially in neuron-rich areas (e.g., hippocampus)39. TSHR codes for the major autoantigen in the autoimmune hyperthyroidism of Graves’ disease, which is associated (p < 10−20 with OR’s 1.4~1.5) with intron 1 polymorphisms40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48. A recent population-based study found that 5,351 same-sex married men among the assayed population of 2,252,751 Danish men had an elevated rate ratio of Graves’ disease (RR = 1.88; 95% CI = 1.08–3.01), a finding which held when excluding men with HIV/AIDS49. The authors49 speculate on the possibility that a genetic (or other prenatal) factor might tie together this increased risk for a type of hyperthyroidism (Graves’ disease) with separate observations of lower body weight for homosexual versus heterosexual men (independent of diet or exercise)50,51,52. Females with Graves’ disease have been reported to manifest biased X chromosome inactivation53,54,55, and skewed X chromosome inactivation has also been reported in mothers of homosexual men compared to age-matched mothers of heterosexual men56. Furthermore, a recent retrospective chart review of 790 adolescents (8 to 17 years) previously admitted to a child psychiatry service found 15 mothers with a history of thyroid dysfunction during pregnancy, 16 adolescents with a history of same-sex attraction and/or gender nonconformity, and 12 overlapping mother-offspring pairs with both (p < 0.0001), suggestive of a possible relationship57. Thus converging findings, including suggestive evidence from the current study, point to a possible connection between thyroid function and sexual orientation in men.
    Last edited by sumskilz; February 21, 2018 at 07:47 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  8. #48
    Elfdude's Avatar Tribunus
    Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    7,335

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    I wasn't looking at that gene in particular but rather speaking about the plurality of genetics associated with homosexuality. Yes, a gene associated with grave's disease is also associated with being gay.

    This has a good run up of the different proposed reasons for existence and maintenance of homosexual populations.
    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc...=rep1&type=pdf

  9. #49
    Kritias's Avatar Petite bourgeois
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,344

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    I don't have enough info to argue on the homosexuality issue.

    However, there's a gross misunderstanding of what racism is. The biological argument, in particular, is under a huge strain to fit the bill. Evolutionary biology and biosociology have shown that there's an inherent distrust of strangers going on, despite of their color. You get this feeling when social and biological intention markers are not ticked.

    In the case of biological indicators, the most rudimental are the show of smiles or palms. That's why you see politicians on TV smiling and showing their hands when they speak. Also, that's why when you're walking down the street and you come across a smileless, hidden-palms sort of person you immediately enter the FFF (Fight-Flight-Freeze) mechanism. That's also why people feel uneasy when they're in elevators, as the fight response is the only option to survive: yet, since we know that fighting may incur the danger of injury, no body wants to throw the first punch. If you think this isn't a biological response to strangers in general, let's do a little test. Check how you feel when you hear this. If you felt uneasy after a few seconds, that's because your brain has linked this sort of sound to the situation where you're trapped in a tin box with no way of escape. Social indicators revolve around code of dress, the existance of warrior culture indicators (ie. tattos) and perceived hierarchy. The argument racism is biological presumes that because blacks are allegedly viewed in general as holding lower status, the response of racism occurs. Funny fact is that it actually works in reverse. You're not afraid of someone who is lower status than you. You're afraid of someone who is of higher status because he has the ability and "jungle-right" to beat you to a pulp.

    So what is racism? In short, a social construct.

    You can see that if you take into account the Romans and Greek writers. These people weren't predisposed negatively towards the blacks back then but against the hairy barbarians of the north. If you read the Illiad, par example, you see that the Olympians are transfixed by the beauty and prowess of Memnon and his army when he comes to the aid of Troy; these people were named Aethiopians, which means 'of dark skin'. Similarly, ancient Greek sources are littered by examples of Gods and heroes struck with "jungle fever", meaning getting romantically involved with blacks. Also, there's the known attitude of Gods getting tired and go for vacation amongst the "blameless Aethiopians". Roman scources follow the same trend. On the reverse, if you study these writers you get a less than fair depiction of western europe inhabitants.

    Some examples why racism is socially constructed to favour western europe. Many historians, today as in the past, claim to find a uniqueness in the culture of very early Europe, something which they connect with the early Indo-Europeans (e.g., Lelekov 1985; Baechler 1988) or the Germans (e.g., Macfarlane 1978; 1986; Crone 1989) or the Iron-Age peasants (Mann 1986; 1988), and quite regularly attach to the ancient Greeks as contradistinct from their non-Indo-European neighbors (see the analysis of this matter in Bernal 1987). In Marx's Germany, the conventional wisdom was that ancient Germans were uniquely freedom-loving, innovative, individualistic, aggressive, and rational; the modern form of the doctrine does not depart much from this formulation except as it admits Celts and Greeks to membership; no modern evidence adds support. Here, now, are some of the historical theories built upon the doctrine. (i) Ancient Europeans were uniquely inventive and technologically innovative, and thereafter remained so (Jones 1981). (ii) Ancient Europeans acquired a unique love of freedom, which matured then into a democratic state (Mann 1986; Hall, 1985). (iii) Ancient Europeans, because of or in close association with their individualism, adopted a unique family type which then acted to favor progressiveness, innovativeness, and, incipiently, capitalism (Jones 1981; Macfarlane 1986; Todd 1985).

    Many theories begin Europe's uniqueness with Roman times, or slightly earlier, often focusing on the Church, or the partly pre-Christian "Judeo- Christian tradition," or the later Western Church. Different theories find different causes for the emergence of the new, and unique, and uniquely progressive culture. The effects also are manifold. For instance: (i) Lynn White, Jr,. argues that the Judeo-Christian teleology explains Western technological inventiveness and innovativeness (see Blaut forthcoming 1992); (ii) Anderson (1974) sees something uniquely scientific and intellectual in the cultural heirs to the Greeks and Romans; (iii) Werner (1988) believes that European s became uniquely progressive because Christianity alone gave prominence to the individual.

    A great many present-day historians believe that Europeans long ago acquired an ability to resist the Malthusian disasters which supposedly blocked development in every other culture, some of the arguments starting with the ancient Iron Age folk, some with an amalgam of Germanic and Christian elements, some with medieval Northwest-Europeans (see Mann 1986; Macfarlane 1986; Jones 1981; Stone 1977; Crone 1989 and many others). This then becomes a general theory explaining what some call the "European miracle," by arguing that the (mythically unique) European family, nuclear, late-marrying, companionate, led to population control (Hall [1985: 131] speaks of "the relative continence of the European family"); led also to a capitalist mentality (Macfarlane 1986; Laslett 1988); even led unmarried European men to go forth and conquer the world because of their sexual frustration (Stone 1977: 54).

    So... No.
    Under the valued patronage of Abdülmecid I

  10. #50

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Quote Originally Posted by Elfdude View Post
    I wasn't looking at that gene in particular but rather speaking about the plurality of genetics associated with homosexuality. Yes, a gene associated with grave's disease is also associated with being gay.

    This has a good run up of the different proposed reasons for existence and maintenance of homosexual populations.
    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc...=rep1&type=pdf
    Yeah, so you got a list of hypotheses there. If your entire set of claims is based on cross-species hypotheses, you're overstating your claims quite a bit.

    You said:

    Quote Originally Posted by Elfdude View Post
    SLITRK6, TSHR, XQ28, and some other 20 or so genes which are linked to homosexuality, also the variants which seem to lead to homosexuality are social promoters which increase one's ability to interact successfully with others...
    SLITRK6, TSHR, Xq28 are the GWAS hits I'm aware of that have some support. Xq28 is not a gene, but a region on the X chromosome. It's been suggested that mutations in the Xq28 region explain more female typical levels of neuroticism in homosexual men, due to this. However, associations between Xq28 and homosexuality have not been replicated in some studies. Nothing in the specifically identified genes support your claims. As already mentioned, TSHR seems to contribute to different thyroid function in homosexual men, hence the Grave's disease association. SLITRK6 codes a protein that is important to hearing and vision. Mutations to SLITRK6 are associated with myopia and deafness. Completely knocking the gene out, doesn't really make much difference in the behavior of mice. Nothing else is known.

    In summery, any claims regarding the effects of these genes in homosexual men (beyond those I already mentioned) are highly speculative at best. Although male homosexuality is 34-39% heritable. There is reason to assume that common genes which contribute male homosexuality in particular circumstances, also have fitness benefits in some contexts, based on the rationale I explained in this post.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  11. #51
    Aexodus's Avatar Persuasion>Coercion
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NI
    Posts
    8,764
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    @Elfdude My point was indeed that if a church doesnt want to marry a gay couple as it goes against their beliefs, no government should have the power to make them do so.
    Patronised by Pontifex Maximus
    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    The trick is to never be honest. That's what this social phenomenon is engineering: publicly conform, or else.

  12. #52

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    I don’t think that was ever a large issue. Simply acknowledgig that same sex unions should be able to enjoy the same economic benefits as heterosexual couples is. Religious fanatics have fought long and hard against allowing same sex couples marry.

  13. #53
    Aexodus's Avatar Persuasion>Coercion
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NI
    Posts
    8,764
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Opposing same-sex marriage on religious grounds doesn't make you a fanatic... If that were the case then I guess I live in a country of fanatics

    On the topic of economic benefits, what does marriage have that civil partnerships don't.
    Patronised by Pontifex Maximus
    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    The trick is to never be honest. That's what this social phenomenon is engineering: publicly conform, or else.

  14. #54

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Quote Originally Posted by Settra View Post
    If things were as you say then every society everywhere would have displayed at one point or another the exact same traits, yet we have clear examples pointing to the opposite - such as the roman empire which did not care what your skin color or orientation was as long as you payed your dues and did not cause trouble.
    Saudi intolerance is generated top to bottom, not because such behavior in inherent to human society. Basically the ruling family believes that the ideas of an 18th century wacko are law and the people follow suit. This is further demonstrated tby the fact that just next door to Saudi Arabia you have two Arab countries which practice a lot of tolerance (Kuwait and Jordan)
    In fact if you look at world history most of the intolerance was generated top to bottom. Christian Iberians had lived peacefully along-side Jews for centuries until the Spanish crown decided they were non-people. The conquistadors moved to the Americas to get rich, not because they particularly hated the natives. The Atlantic slave trade existed because African chieftains sold their own people and European monarchs said it was good and legal, not because Europeans hated black people.
    Human societies do exhibit quite similar traits, I don't know why you would think they would be the exact same. Every sizeable society I can think of had prejudices of some sort. It isn't as if every civilization has expressed every "ism" in the same way, but they are all subject to tribalism (it's how our ancestors evolved in Africa). Humans need to have an "us" group and "them" group to understand social relationships. If aliens invaded tomorrow, you would very quickly see China, the US, and Russia all put aside our differences and fight them side by side as brothers because now there is a new "them" to unite "us". The Romans did this just like everyone else.
    Quote Originally Posted by Settra View Post
    Besides, if your argument if correct then all the isms are inherent and a key element of society since Adam and Eve. By combating them you are in fact combating biology and that can lead to only 2 outcomes from where I stand: you lose and everything you are combating is reinforced, or you succeed to unravel society as a whole.
    No, the "isms" are just an expression of our tribalism by different criteria. We need a way to categorize people, to define the "them" and "us", which you can do by skin color, religion, social status, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Settra View Post
    And if you hadn't insisted on calling it marriage, but rather called it for what it was - a civil union - you would have gotten it decades earlier. 99.99% of people who oppose gay marriage and gay rights don't actually hate gay people. They do so because of what happens at gay pride parades and because you are asking them to step on long held values without providing any coherent argument as to why they should do that.
    Woah, hit a nerve here. I don't know why you are saying "you" I am not gay, personally. I never claimed people who oppose gay marriage hate gay people, though I am sure some do, I was just pointing out that we had old religious conventions impacting our modern law. I don't care if someone has different values about gay marriage, but someone thinking they can impose their personal morals on others via the law is problematic.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    Opposing same-sex marriage on religious grounds doesn't make you a fanatic... If that were the case then I guess I live in a country of fanatics
    Of course not, they become fanatics with they demand control of the legal status of others.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    On the topic of economic benefits, what does marriage have that civil partnerships don't.
    They are considered legally different by both federal and state governments. This comes into play with things like child-custody, inheritance, medical rights, and I am sure several other things I can't think of at the moment. I think it is also worth noting that American Christians do not own the concept of "marriage" and we really shouldn't let them think that they do unchallanged.
    Last edited by The spartan; February 22, 2018 at 02:41 PM.
    They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.

  15. #55

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    1) Marriage is a thing on how people arrange their private lives, correct?

    2) What goes between two consenting adults in their space, the state has no business to interfere.

    This are 2 of the most sucessful persuasion points of the left regarding romance and sexuality.

    Which the left proceeds to trample after;

    By demanding the state to push more and more laws to define what is marriage and what is not marriage; the Official Answer to this philosophical question comes from State Lawmakers and State Officers.
    By making marriage laws a constant public debate, and by constantly defying what marriage means, many times trampling and discarding the previous laws and consensus from 5 years ago, or less, and re-igniting a public outrage over who has the right to marry or not;

    Marriage ends up becoming this weird, formless thing, where the only consensus is that it is a relationship between two consenting adults, where the state has more and more the agency in interfering and regulating what can and can't be done. The state ends up having more tacit power on regulating the relationship of the two adults than either the husband or the wife!

    So much for claiming what goes between two consenting adults, no right of state to interfere.

    At this rate, someday starting a business will have less state intervention than marriage.
    Last edited by fkizz; February 22, 2018 at 06:40 PM.
    It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.

    -George Orwell

  16. #56

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Hey, I would love it if the government got out of "marriage" altogether and just had legal unions. They aren't going to do that, though, so we might as well have the legal privileges equal.
    They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.

  17. #57

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    Opposing same-sex marriage on religious grounds doesn't make you a fanatic... If that were the case then I guess I live in a country of fanatics
    When you make efforts to put it into law you're gonna be called an extremist, and they would be right. It is extremist to use your religious beliefs to write legislation.

    On the topic of economic benefits, what does marriage have that civil partnerships don't.
    You're not allowed to forbid homosexual from calling their civil union marriage. Religion doesn't own words and it doesn't own their meaning either. The idea that homosexuals should have to dance around words in a legal and casual setting is a joke and the insistence of Churches to put an emphasis on semantics is laughable, until they start campaigning for enforcing their absurd views through law, at which point it becomes tyranny.

  18. #58

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    I'm pretty sure "legalizing" gay marriage just means government recognition of it. Gay people weren't actually being arrested for having a wedding and calling the relationship a marriage. You can even marry a rock if you want.

    https://www.ranker.com/list/13-peopl...s/jude-newsome
    Ignore List (to save time):

    Exarch, Coughdrop addict

  19. #59

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Quote Originally Posted by Elfdude View Post
    Harhar. That's right, you only profile leftists, feminists, sjws, liberals, muslims, and latinx. I forgot that totally doesn't count.
    They do it to themselves. That's what identity politics is...

    Which is to say, you're willing to pay higher taxes so that the rich don't have to.
    No, rich people still pay a higher number of taxes than I do.

    Wait, you realize the issue in what you just said right? Talk about assumptions. Mr. I don't profile!
    Well am I wrong? Saying homosexuals prefer members of their own sex isn't profiling - it is stating a fact...


    <plays world's smallest violin>

    So you could care less that you can't be fired for your sexual orientation but you're angry about $695. You know the sunset on the Trump tax cuts will have you paying more than this right?
    My sexual orientation doesn't come into the work place, so I'm not really worried about that. Neither do my politics or my religion. It's the work place, not a support group or a family reunion. So far I've been pretty successful in my work life by not announcing to every new client or employer who I'm sexually attracted to the moment I meet them.

    And it's way more money than that. Way, way more. $695 per month sounds closer to the mark for an individual, who will still come partially out of pocket for most doctor visits and treatments. Your flippancy regarding just how bad Obamacare is makes me think you don't know much about it.
    No Liberal has tried to take away your gun. Hyperbole is a argument.
    Lol. ok.

    Such as?
    Planned parenthood.

    You can't escape from the fact a vast majority of liberals are pro big government, pro coercive legislation, and ultimately base their world views on non-realities like your getting fired from work for being gay scenario. This stands in opposition to all my values.
    Last edited by Pontifex Maximus; February 24, 2018 at 11:35 AM.

  20. #60

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

    Quote Originally Posted by Séverus Sńape View Post
    You can't escape from the fact a vast majority of liberals are pro big government, pro coercive legislation, and ultimately base their world views on non-realities like your getting fired from work for being gay scenario. This stands in opposition to all my values.
    People do need to be careful with sweeping statements, I am sure there is a whole spectrum of politics to the left of yourself. I would also think you have more refined critiques of political others rather than "They are bad guys". You think Liberals really support "coercive legislation" and "non-realities"? Would you like it if people tell you that you are crazy and support fascism?
    They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •