One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
Last edited by Vanoi; July 19, 2019 at 08:49 PM.
Why are leftists libertarian when sexual immorality is involved but totalitarian when it comes to economics? If the government doesn't exist to protect people from themselves, why are there any business regulations at all? Why are there welfare programs? Why are there minimum wage laws? If one person consents to work for another person for $2/hour, why should that be a crime? Isn't sexual immorality infinitely more foul and personally destructive than working in an office for $6/hour? Why should the government ban one but not the other? It makes no sense. Do leftists have a coherent ideology at all?
Last edited by Prodromos; July 19, 2019 at 08:56 PM. Reason: Serious question
Ignore List (to save time):
Exarch, Coughdrop addict
Supporting free expression doesn't make you a leftist nor even really a libertarian.
Economic policy and constitutional rights are two different things that don't have to necessarily match up.
Last edited by Vanoi; July 19, 2019 at 09:04 PM.
Let's see, Gaiden's "points and questions":
"Are you hypocritical?
Ban them all or ban none."
Neither of which follow logically from my question ("Are you Basil").
Hence non-sequiturs.
Gaiden follows with these "points":
"It's not like the courts will side with you at all. Might as well go for broke. If you just ban the people you don't like they sure as ain't gonna let it stand."
I don't recall making any mention of courts or banning people.
Hence another non-sequitur.
What he says does not follow from what I said.
You then note that you edited your post, and this is what it now says:
What "partisan application of law" am I supporting?
Please, do provide the quote from me.
See, we aren't actually exchanging ideas here, you are trying to play chess. Basil supports a republican law that would specifically target drag pageant shows for kids, tying it to child sexualization and pedophilia, while accepting straight pageants as being legally acceptable. This would imply that, from his point of view, there is something distinct about drag child pageants because it warrants special legal consideration (banning). You seem to be supporting the idea that because Basil said "Bad sexualization of kids period" he isn't being hypocritical, while he actually hasn't disavowed the idea that drag child pageants should be banned while straight pageants should be kept legal, as his original post makes clear.
But, if you just want to play games, I guess my counter would be: I didn't say you supported partisan application of law, I said IF you support the proposed law. Don't put words in my mouth, bro.
They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.
Last edited by conon394; July 19, 2019 at 09:23 PM.
IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites
'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'
But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.
Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.
No, what you are actually doing is attempting to speak for Gaiden. Much like you attempt to speak for Basil.
All coming from the non-sequiturs.
But you cant provide a quote, (as I have taken no position hence non-sequitur). You are simply trying to cover for your idiotic assertions.
In other words, as you commonly accuse others, you are arguing in bad faith.
Dismissed
Last edited by Infidel144; July 19, 2019 at 09:29 PM.
Ok, so you are just going to play games. If I am the one acting in bad faith, how come you lied and accused me of saying you support partisan application of law. I said "probably" and "if", but you lied and said that I said you actually did. Hm?! I don't really like these games though so I am probably not going to respond to you unless you want to actually talk about the topic of the thread. Gaidin is probably right in saying you are just looking for an out to nullify the conversation, so we will just carry on without you I guess.
They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.
Notice that what I did was put the question to The spartan's attempt to speak for Gaiden. I ask Gaiden to explain himself, and The spartan, jumps in, to explain what Gaiden means. The spartan, of course, and much like Gaiden, has no idea what he is on about. While I actually quoted the spartan in my question.
The spartan, who says he is "probably not going to respond to me", should perhaps have thought about it before jumping in to respond to my question for Basil (in which he paints Basil's position to his own liking).
LGBT activists seem to be high on this child drag shows. Then we have a problem. It's also not the only problem they have. Laws punishing ''dead naming'', transwomen in women sports, transgender education for kids with books like ''Princess Boy''.
The liberal approach seems to bow down to whatever irrational and bizarre demand out of fear to be branded -phobe. No thanks.
I said I'm against them. You are resorting to lies now? Hardly surprising. The 3 liberal tactics: deny, derail, defame.
Last edited by Basil II the B.S; July 20, 2019 at 01:02 AM.
What does that mean? Of all the LGBT people I know, none have kids who do drag shows. Maybe it is a bad sample? But I would have a hard time believing this was a common thing LGBT parents do.
But those issues aren't relevant to the topic of the thread, are they?
Well yeah, that's quite literally what Liberalism is (not the phobe part, the part of going along with whatever "irrational" or "bizarre" thing). The concept of telling people that the stuff they want to do is "bizarre" or "irrational" is not very Liberal. "Moral degeneracy" is not a phrase Liberals use very often, that's more of a trad con thing.
You are? By the OP you seem pretty focused on drag shows in particular, but if you are wanting this bill to apply to all child pageantry, then I can't very well call you a hypocrite on it. I mean, I disagree that the government should be the one banning such activities, we tend to take parental domain of children rather seriously over here unless you have some pretty clear evidence the child is suffering from abuse. Not that I approve of the events themselves, it has always been on the creepsy side of activity for children as they seem to try to more closely emulate adult beauty pageants (like in the Little Miss Sunshine clip). Flat out banning the activity would seem difficult and broad, and perhaps a bad precedent of government interference into personal activities. Not saying you are saying this, but the continued slipper slope could go onto parents not being able to sign their kids up for contact sports because of a vague State interest into "child abuse" of "forcing" their kids to do a contact sport.
I guess I should add the question of if you think there is something particular to child drag that is more worthy of legal action than normal child pageantry? Or rather, what specific part of the idea of child pageantry has got you worked up in the OP? Is it just that children are being sexualized, or is the LGBT component of drag tied up in the concern somewhere?
Last edited by The spartan; July 20, 2019 at 02:26 AM.
They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.
So your argument now is that... you don't like the OP talking about drag shows but it should talk about pageants? How about you make your own thread about it?
And it still doesn't change the dishonest bs you just did. Why did you say I'm in favour of child pageants after I stated I am not?
No, my argument is that I want to know the OPs particular focus drag shows instead of pageants at large. I want clarification on the focus of your concern; is it the sexualization of children that you have a problem with (which would include far more than just drag shows) or is the LGBT element of drag important to your concern?
I didn't say you "favored" child pageants, I said you seemed ok (legally) with it because you had not made it clear if you would want child pageants at large to be banned or you just wanted child drag banned. All while your OP is specifically directed at LGBT, gay marriage, and trans-rights for some reason. You didn't seem very concerned with the decades of child sexualization in pageants that already existed, the LGBT component seemed real important to your outrage/concern.
They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.
That's what the article whined about.
Both.
Sexualization of children is bad, period. A movement whose focus is primarily sexual orientation should stay the away from kids.
Where in the thread or ever?
A similar bs that shows how liberals are increasingly becoming apologetic of pedophilia and not only.
An Italian region is approving a regulation in favour of punishing homophobia and transphobia. Liberal journalists and lawyers are upset that the right has required an amendment to exclude pedophilia, zoophilia and necrophilia.
https://www.giornalettismo.com/emend...pedofilia/amp/
Why is it so hard for liberals to denounce pedos?
So you agree there is no child abuse? Because their opinion doesn't trump the 1st Amendment.
Nope only one actually involves abuse. If child pagents were abusive they would be banned correct? Yet they are not. Do try again.Both have to do with abuse and sexualization of children.