Demonizing people
- Thread starter Sorcerer
- Start date
I'd hate to see you go, but I'd understand.
My advice? Hang out until this Syne situation is resolved. Hopefully, it won't be long now.
It is, however, a rather ingenious new rhetorical device. It is the classic Argumentum ab auctoritate (appeal to authority) - but with a new twist; he uses himself as the authority in his capacity as moderator. By putting his opinion in a "mod note" he attempts to add this level of authority to his argument.
The f*** with authority, just spit in his face.
Whoa. I just saw these remarks. My bad! I just meant to say off to other threads here at Sci which are not under martial law. 
But hey I appreciate your kind remarks. I have great respect for each of you, not only for being bright and reasonable, but for not caving in to that segment of society which is so consumed by glorifying ignorance just to prop up these mean stupid rationalizations of homophobia. As each of you have expressed on many occasions, in so many different ways, when one minority is singled out and targeted for abuse, the whole of society is undermined. We each have a vested interest in our mutual advancement. The homosexual a religious bigot fantasizes about stoning, through the concerted effort of all good people worldwide to preserve his or her rights, may, for all we know, be the person who solves the energy crisis, cures some terminal disease, doubles the agricultural output of impoverished nations, or once and for all convinces Christians worldwide that this numb-nuts idea of demonizing human beings under color of religious principle, is just utterly bogus. Or not. Maybe he/she is the average Joe or Joanne across the street, watering their yard and simply trying to be a decent human being. And Gawd knows we need more of them!
And so dear friends I salute you!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf1zSz4QN6A
(and if it's not your cup o' tea at least you can at least do squats to the beat.)
(kind of my answer to Onward Christian Soldiers)
But hey I appreciate your kind remarks. I have great respect for each of you, not only for being bright and reasonable, but for not caving in to that segment of society which is so consumed by glorifying ignorance just to prop up these mean stupid rationalizations of homophobia. As each of you have expressed on many occasions, in so many different ways, when one minority is singled out and targeted for abuse, the whole of society is undermined. We each have a vested interest in our mutual advancement. The homosexual a religious bigot fantasizes about stoning, through the concerted effort of all good people worldwide to preserve his or her rights, may, for all we know, be the person who solves the energy crisis, cures some terminal disease, doubles the agricultural output of impoverished nations, or once and for all convinces Christians worldwide that this numb-nuts idea of demonizing human beings under color of religious principle, is just utterly bogus. Or not. Maybe he/she is the average Joe or Joanne across the street, watering their yard and simply trying to be a decent human being. And Gawd knows we need more of them!
And so dear friends I salute you!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf1zSz4QN6A
(and if it's not your cup o' tea at least you can at least do squats to the beat.)
(kind of my answer to Onward Christian Soldiers)
Whoa. I just saw these remarks. My bad! I just meant to say off to other threads here at Sci which are not under martial law.
But hey I appreciate your kind remarks. I have great respect for each of you, not only for being bright and reasonable, but for not caving in to that segment of society which is so consumed by glorifying ignorance just to prop up these mean stupid rationalizations of homophobia. As each of you have expressed on many occasions, in so many different ways, when one minority is singled out and targeted for abuse, the whole of society is undermined. We each have a vested interest in our mutual advancement. The homosexual a religious bigot fantasizes about stoning, through the concerted effort of all good people worldwide to preserve his or her rights, may, for all we know, be the person who solves the energy crisis, cures some terminal disease, doubles the agricultural output of impoverished nations, or once and for all convinces Christians worldwide that this numb-nuts idea of demonizing human beings under color of religious principle, is just utterly bogus. Or not. Maybe he/she is the average Joe or Joanne across the street, watering their yard and simply trying to be a decent human being. And Gawd knows we need more of them!
And so dear friends I salute you!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf1zSz4QN6A
(and if it's not your cup o' tea at least you can at least do squats to the beat.)
(kind of my answer to Onward Christian Soldiers)
Thank god (whoops) you're not leaving.
Village People would be better.
Once this issue was opened for discussion, I feel entitled to comment on it, even though I know I will be bushwhacked at the first opportunity.
MEMBER NOTE:
billvon rules. Il Duce drools.
:bravo:--{cheee-YEK!!!}
Thankee! Brilliant march, but as far as doing squats my thighs are already screaming from doing Jillian's thirty day shred,
Hayell No! I wouldn't miss the good vibe at Sci. Just lost my desire to say whatever I was going to say here when I came upon that trollish post.
Hey no joke. I hated their music but I thought it remarkable that they became icons for "coming out" in those days. As minorities, esp. blacks, and women were finally getting their rights of self-determination, WASPs had only to look at the LGBTs as their fallback punching bags, to absorb all that venom which no longer could be lawfully inflicted on the other groups. If you think about it, a whole bunch of pop/rock figures began trying more provocative & cross-gender costumes for the next decade or so. Most of that music sucked I thought, but the liberating nature of the performances was phenomenal.
That reminds me that religious people were beginning to really regret that they had called Elvis or early British invasion music "satanic". Man, I bet by the mid 70s they wished they could go back to the days when John Lennon was saying "God is Dead". This demonizing business branches out into just about everything we would call thoughtful. It built up so much steam during the McCarthy years (the Cold War blacklisting of American liberals under the presumption they were Communist sympathizers) that it just had to dump that load out all over everybody who wasn't like them. That's all it is -- pent up anger. I am convinced that they only really hate themselves. Who, other than a whiny self-loathing worm would even bother to care about the private lives of strangers? It's sick! And it's so pathetic.
Ok everybody: syncopated retch:
uke:(watch me get spanked for using an official site smilie.)
:spank:
which brings up the other deviant form of loathing, the really sick kind of sado-masochism. It's so gruesome in the way it's rendered in Jesus. No wonder some of the people hate themselves so much. They really do thrive on pain. What's up with that? :bugeye:
Yeah, it isn't very surprising to be honest. The appeal to authority was, to say the least, stunning... especially since it was his OWN authority he was appealing to...
How much longer do we have to wait, man? The shit is going on back there.
I think it's time for an accounting. You guys keep saying it's being worked on, yet he keeps attacking. Let's have some fucking answers already.
I too would like an update on the progress. What does it take? A civil war?
Honestly, I fear a civil war might actually get things done faster.
Then what are we waiting for? The establishment apparently can't protect us from this troll, so let's go ahead and protect ourselves.
There is a difference though - here, you have no inherent "rights" as per the agreement "signed" (rather, checked off on) upon signing up; additionally, there is no real action you can engage that would enact the desired outcome (short of, you know, tracking his whereabouts down and lynch-mobbing him, but there are legality issues with that). Unlike a country, in which the populace could come together, march upon the capital, and enact change (albeit, most likely with bloodshed and lots of violence), there is nowhere to "march on" here.
I am not saying a public protest would be impotent; merely, the best outcome it could have would be to hasten the decision of those in charge as, unfortunately, the public cannot enact the changes themselves (nor can we, the other moderators).
Just filling out tickets has turned you from an enemy to one-man anti-Syne machine.
I think I know what I'm doing.
Notes on the notes
Apparently those mod notes were too difficult for many to parse. Each note was separated and stood on its own. Not all noted posters would have warranted warning/infraction, only those that were told they were trolling. And not all noted posts were off-topic, nor commented on the characteristics or posting style of others.
Yes, every member has the right to determine what, if any, personal information they wish to divulge, and no amount of trolling should pressure them into doing otherwise than they deem prudent.
Yes, calling people names (even if you think they are warranted) is an ad hominem, especially without even so much as a vague attempt at arguing their validity (which would typically require engaging with the accused and answered their questions).
Yes, when someone refers to what marriage "traditionally" means it is reasonably clear that they are making a distinction between that and the new definition, especially when they repeatedly make it a point to say that "same-sex marriage is legal" by contrast.
Apparently those mod notes were too difficult for many to parse. Each note was separated and stood on its own. Not all noted posters would have warranted warning/infraction, only those that were told they were trolling. And not all noted posts were off-topic, nor commented on the characteristics or posting style of others.
Yes, every member has the right to determine what, if any, personal information they wish to divulge, and no amount of trolling should pressure them into doing otherwise than they deem prudent.
Yes, calling people names (even if you think they are warranted) is an ad hominem, especially without even so much as a vague attempt at arguing their validity (which would typically require engaging with the accused and answered their questions).
Yes, when someone refers to what marriage "traditionally" means it is reasonably clear that they are making a distinction between that and the new definition, especially when they repeatedly make it a point to say that "same-sex marriage is legal" by contrast.
Absolutely no one should have to give out personal information, we agree! I was using it as a tactic only with Jan, I do not care what he believes. The question did not really have to be a personal one on my part, heck any direct question on Jan's position on any subject is met with a circle jerk.
That was not in response to Randwulf's post, although he did make accusations of lying and failed to support it (i.e. "union" is not the same as "marriage" otherwise gays would have been satisfied with civil unions).
Whenever the two, homosexuality and pedophilia, are broached together, the typical argument is that a pedophile cannot be homosexual, as they do not have an fully developed adult orientation. Here you seem to claiming otherwise, i.e. that homosexuals can be pedophiles. That is a rare admission.
Wow, does no one here know that:
_____________________________________________
...typically signifies separate ideas, topics, etc.?
IOW, that note had nothing to do with your post. Clear enough?
Part of my duty as moderator (and as stated in feedback to my moderation) is to make it clear why moderation action is taken. That, as well as verbal warnings, necessarily require me to comment on the posting styles of others.
People have the right to protect any information they deem personal. While I suppose you may think that means they should not engage in forum discussions on those sorts of topics, the posting guidelines do guarantee that right, so you would have no defense for trolling on that count, no matter how frustrating you may find it.