(July 11, 2015 at 3:43 pm)TRJF Wrote:(July 11, 2015 at 3:30 pm)Anima Wrote: Pardon? Equivocation? I believe I expressly stated those with an inclination to kill are of greater social benefit and utility than homosexuals, if directed properly. Killing is something society needs for various reasons. Same sex is not something society needs for any reason (you may want to argue it has a use for torture and punishment through rape, such as in prison. But this is effectuated by heteros in prison or inanimate objects).
, the veneer started to crack, and the niceties and politeness you observed disappeared under pressure.
It was never about the legal arguments. You just plain don't like gay people, and you decided to use whatever tools you had at your disposal - in this case, legal tools (by virtue of your education) - to try to advance these views in a way that wouldn't be immediately dismissed. For a while, you succeeded, but you couldn't keep it up forever.
Well, I can't either. I'm going to read what you wrote above one more time, to make sure I've given you every benefit of the doubt, and then I'm going to go vomit.
Wow it is sad when I see people start to get to emotional and start to judge an individual only on their position in an argument. An agrgumeent mind you that is on a damn discussion board at that.
This should not be called a discussion board but a "reeducation of oppositional ideology" board. Just like the camps that were set up in communists nations to "reeducate" the peoples who had opposing communists ideologies for capitalist free nation.
This board's discution was set to discuss homosexuality, FOR FUN !!!, after the Superm Courts ruling. It was ALSO ASKED in what position should the argument be set as, and it was agreeded to be on the social/biological.
This was done by Amina in a rational and organized argument. He has NOT, at all, ever said any words of persional attack or hate to anyone debating him. Yet, many on this board have to him.
Interestingly it not for his use and knowledge of the law, not for his lacking in organization of his idea, or lack of rational or logical structure of his argument, no!! But is only for his arguments position!!
I do not understand this country as to why people have taken started to incorporate their own personal emotional feelings into a discution that is opean for anyone to engage in and dare I say, speak their mind.
Do the people in this counrty not know how to debate or have an ideas on how to have a discution with out becoming persionaly invalved?
Simple summery of speech/ debate class:
1. Topic is X,Y, and Z.
2. What position do you wish,
a) for or opposed,
4. Topic is to be argued in. . .
a) political
b) biological
c) social
--- and so forth
5. Each side have time for stament and respond.
6. And go.
I have said it before and I will say again. To oppose an idea dose not initally mean hate, meanness, treachery, or even vedictovnes. It is only an oppositional idea to the argument nothing more.
This action is both sad and very dangerous to everyone who is not with the days new trendy idea. This makes Ideas, discusstion and debate die becuase of persional offense?!
Maybe I am wrong and we need to do ways with such stupid oppositional ideas, of how the world is flat, global warming is real just like dinosaurs are. All change and achievement should also be stopped
If we all just accepted the majority view of things homosexuality will still be illegal, atheism unheard of in non Communist country's
What has happened? these who were were opposed of have become the opposers ?
What happen to the argument to humanity, freedom, rights, individual thought?
