(April 24, 2013 at 2:38 am)bladevalant546 Wrote: I think the over arc of this issue is, we need to just accept one another based on character of said person.
Hey now... I'm all about judging a person upon their character and their actions... but accept them? HELLS TO THE NO.
They couldn't hold their drink if they were twice their size, and that's saying something, cause they're fat.
Quote:Labels in general cause over generalization and uber-simplication of issues.
Labels are not what causes over-generalizations and uber-simplifications... they are what such over a population are summed under. Observe: this is a leafy wooden sort of monstrosity with branches and roots, and that is a pined wooden sort of monstrosity with branches and roots covered in snow, and there are about a million of these things, and we need a name for them. How about 'tree'? Yeah, that seems nice... and to sum the group, we'll call them 'trees'.
Brilliant.
Quote:I think again we do more good uniting against opression and tyranny in all shapes and from. Also, fight for equality even if it is uncomfortable or against the status quo.
Uniting of itself is demonstrative of oppression and tyranny... the shape is a mass of bodies, the form a pairing of spirit.
I don't actually want to fight for equality in some cases, because equality is inherently unfair. There's an observation my old ex-soviet russian teacher made, and I quote, "We have such a great country, we are all equal! Equally poor."
Some will work for what they have, others will not, equality is equal regardless of state... fairness is deserved regardless of state. Also, incredibly open to interpretation
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
