Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » don't ask don't tell
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441840 is a reply to message #441534] |
Fri, 24 December 2010 07:01   |
 |
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
This thread is pretty gay.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441841 is a reply to message #441828] |
Fri, 24 December 2010 08:14 |
 |
Starbuzzz
Messages: 1637
Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
@ Altzan: opinions? The fact that sexual morals have changed over and over is not an opinion. The fact that your favorite bible kings had hundreds of sex slaves with polygamy being the norm of the day is not an opinion. The fact that religions fail and get replaced by other religions is not an opinion. You deny basic middle school history and call me a " self-righteous know-it-all?"
You don't want to get involved in the debate and I can understand why. So be it.
| Altzan wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 22:15 |
issue this fierce, if it cannot be solved in vast society, certainly won't be solved on a gaming forum.
|
One such issue got solved this week in Congress fyi.
We will move on and solve problems just fine just as we "solved" racism and women's rights. Despite the people who once stood against it and still do, we are better off now than before.
| Altzan wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 22:15 |
I'm under the impression that you have changed based on pressures put on you by your family and church. If that's not the case, forgive my assumption. But if it is, why take it up here, of all places? It's the least likely place to influence anyone's opinion of the subject.
|
This is not at all true. Plus, there is no harm in discussing these here. You seem to mistake discussion as some some form of infectious "propaganda" out to chnage your opinion! wow...
Many traumatized victims of crimes end up fighting for a cause against the crime. The internet is a suitable medium in this day among many others and there is no harm in disussing important issues. It is only a matter of time I see myself speaking openly in public about what I have endured so far. You seem to mistake me as using only this internet forum; how do you know that I have not contacted and am in touch with powerful organizations that can help me?
When you live under a tyranny and are dragged to a mosque, forced to worship facing mecca 5 times a day, and continualy mind-raped over and over and forced to believe something you can't, you would take to doing the same; using any communication medium to get your voice heard and speak out against the tyrants. It doesn't matter if they are the victims of rape, pedopilia, torture, or any other forms of tyranny.
So your statment of a person changing under pressure is irrelavent. Yes, they do. Some end up adapting to the pressure and some fight against it in anyway they can. I am obviously the latter. It's as silly as asking the persecuted chinese bloggers to quit whining about their freedom because they can't influence anbody. Yeah, they can and they are making the world know of their problems. Because not everyone leads a comfortable life with basic civil rights insured such as you.
| Altzan wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 22:15 |
I know I will be flamed for this. I know you all will think I am "gracefully withdrawing in defeat", "bitterly frustrated" with nothing to prove. Think that if you want. But not everything is a debate with a clear winner or loser, Starbuzzz. And I'm not obligated to enter it. Especially when you feel so compelled to insert thinly veiled contempt and insult every chance you get.
|
After the "mile-long-post" which clearly unsettled you, you made a one-liner about me "throwing a mile long post about politics and religion." Why did you do that first? Considering that was not all aimed at anyone in particular.
Have a nice holidays, Altzan. Maybe during this quiet time, you will finally think about all the people who are not as well-off as you elsewhere in the world and would finally stop whining about being insulted.
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441842 is a reply to message #441841] |
Fri, 24 December 2010 08:29 |
 |
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| Altzan wrote |
But if it is, why take it up here, of all places? It's the least likely place to influence anyone's opinion of the subject.
|
i've heard this sort of question before. "the internet isn't the right place to talk about this", sort of thing.
well, for most of history christianity didn't want you talking about it at all. you think books are a better option than the internet? you weren't allowed to own a bible in your own language for over 1000 years, they'd kill you if you tried. most people couldn't read AT ALL for most of christian history, the content of the bible was a secret the clergy had no interest in sharing with the common people. then you've got the vatican's long track record of banning books it doesn't like, etc etc etc...
the internet, by contrast, is great. not much censorship, much more accessible to people than the Bible used to be when the churches really had things their own way. long live e-debates!
merry christmas everyone, have a nice day with your families
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441844 is a reply to message #441842] |
Fri, 24 December 2010 10:15 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Altzan wrote |
But if it is, why take it up here, of all places?
|
Yeah! What's up with all this discussing and debating that goes on in this sub-forum entiled "Heated Discussions and Debates"? It's just about the least appropriate place for this kind of thing.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441845 is a reply to message #441840] |
Fri, 24 December 2010 11:13 |
Pyr0man1c
Messages: 186
Registered: April 2009
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 08:01 |
This thread is pretty gay.
|
I don't like gay things :/
"Sapere Aude- Dare to be wise"
| AmunRa |
and its all this "drama" that will one day end renegade...
|
Quotes| v00d00 |
A question regarding RenGuard. Because it's a client/server application, what will stop the legions of people who cheat, and can crack apps, from reverse engineering it down to it's core protocol / encryption (which I'll assume it has), and duplicating it, so that they have their own client which responds to the server with all the correct info for an unpatched Renegade, but in fact is patched.
Personally, I think you should write a server-side only anti-cheat, which hooks the networking routines in Renegade. From there, using either the help of your staff who worked on creating Renegade, or from knowledge aquired while working with the network code in Renegade, create a system to monitor hit locations (did they REALLY hit, based on calculations by the anti-cheat (stopping BH)), how much damage are they claiming, vs how much damage their currently selected weapon really does, etc.
Then, add rate-of-fire checking, complete w/ lag tolerance (since lagged client will of course, upon delag, seem to fire faster, etc), and option to simply "edit" the incoming packets, to filter out the cheat (reduce damage, stop bullets, etc), or kick-ban the cheater (admins decision, based on anti cheat config).
Is it just me, or does that make more sense?
The flaw to Renegade of course, which is the core to the cheats, is that unlike most other games, Renegade lets the CLIENT decide hit locations, damage, RoF, etc. Vs others which say, "ok, the client fired their pistol along this trajectory. Did they hit something? How much damage did they do to that target if so. Report findings to clients".
My only concern, is that there will be alot more teams of people ripping apart the hard work of your small team, and undoing what you have done. Can you keep up writing fixes / completely rewriting the protocol to counter them once they have created their OWN complete anti-RenGuard client? If not, consider the server-side only method, and solve it once and for all, with the only version changes being to fix bugs, and not complete rewrites which will really piss admins off (if it takes this long for the initial, how long after the cheaters create their own client to counter it will your rewrite take to do?).
- v00d00
|
| ELiT3FLyR |
ill say this again to all the TT people actually working on the patch. all you have to do is fix the bugs in the game. This is your role. dont get involved in a pointfix debate that you can never win (spoony has never managed to win one and hes a decent player) nor bother suggesting solutions for the faults in pointfix. just fix the damn bugs and you will all be remmebered as renegade heroes.
|
[Updated on: Fri, 24 December 2010 12:25] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441846 is a reply to message #441534] |
Fri, 24 December 2010 11:16 |
Pyr0man1c
Messages: 186
Registered: April 2009
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Edit: oops
"Sapere Aude- Dare to be wise"
| AmunRa |
and its all this "drama" that will one day end renegade...
|
Quotes| v00d00 |
A question regarding RenGuard. Because it's a client/server application, what will stop the legions of people who cheat, and can crack apps, from reverse engineering it down to it's core protocol / encryption (which I'll assume it has), and duplicating it, so that they have their own client which responds to the server with all the correct info for an unpatched Renegade, but in fact is patched.
Personally, I think you should write a server-side only anti-cheat, which hooks the networking routines in Renegade. From there, using either the help of your staff who worked on creating Renegade, or from knowledge aquired while working with the network code in Renegade, create a system to monitor hit locations (did they REALLY hit, based on calculations by the anti-cheat (stopping BH)), how much damage are they claiming, vs how much damage their currently selected weapon really does, etc.
Then, add rate-of-fire checking, complete w/ lag tolerance (since lagged client will of course, upon delag, seem to fire faster, etc), and option to simply "edit" the incoming packets, to filter out the cheat (reduce damage, stop bullets, etc), or kick-ban the cheater (admins decision, based on anti cheat config).
Is it just me, or does that make more sense?
The flaw to Renegade of course, which is the core to the cheats, is that unlike most other games, Renegade lets the CLIENT decide hit locations, damage, RoF, etc. Vs others which say, "ok, the client fired their pistol along this trajectory. Did they hit something? How much damage did they do to that target if so. Report findings to clients".
My only concern, is that there will be alot more teams of people ripping apart the hard work of your small team, and undoing what you have done. Can you keep up writing fixes / completely rewriting the protocol to counter them once they have created their OWN complete anti-RenGuard client? If not, consider the server-side only method, and solve it once and for all, with the only version changes being to fix bugs, and not complete rewrites which will really piss admins off (if it takes this long for the initial, how long after the cheaters create their own client to counter it will your rewrite take to do?).
- v00d00
|
| ELiT3FLyR |
ill say this again to all the TT people actually working on the patch. all you have to do is fix the bugs in the game. This is your role. dont get involved in a pointfix debate that you can never win (spoony has never managed to win one and hes a decent player) nor bother suggesting solutions for the faults in pointfix. just fix the damn bugs and you will all be remmebered as renegade heroes.
|
[Updated on: Fri, 24 December 2010 12:23] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441848 is a reply to message #441841] |
Fri, 24 December 2010 12:11 |
 |
Altzan
Messages: 1586
Registered: September 2008
Location: Tennessee
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
opinions? The fact that sexual morals have changed over and over is not an opinion. The fact that your favorite bible kings had hundreds of sex slaves with polygamy being the norm of the day is not an opinion. The fact that religions fail and get replaced by other religions is not an opinion. You deny basic middle school history and call me a " self-righteous know-it-all?"
|
Your belief on how homosexuals should be treated is indeed an opinion. That's what I was getting at.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
You don't want to get involved in the debate and I can understand why. So be it.
|
If that's true, I'm glad.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
One such issue got solved this week in Congress fyi. We will move on and solve problems just fine just as we "solved" racism and women's rights. Despite the people who once stood against it and still do, we are better off now than before.
|
Good. But beside the point.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
Plus, there is no harm in discussing these here.
|
Of course. 
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
You seem to mistake discussion as some some form of infectious "propaganda" out to chnage your opinion! wow...
|
Your post earlier was not even close to neutral. It was heavily laced with pride and contempt. If I heard you speak it face-to-face, it would disgust me.
You have valid points, but speaking them the way you do indicates you're not out to change anyone's thoughts, you're out to rub it in their faces.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
Many traumatized victims of crimes end up fighting for a cause against the crime. The internet is a suitable medium in this day among many others and there is no harm in disussing important issues. It is only a matter of time I see myself speaking openly in public about what I have endured so far. You seem to mistake me as using only this internet forum; how do you know that I have not contacted and am in touch with powerful organizations that can help me?
|
If it's just for expression and not to start a fight, then it's great.
I'd think that if you did get in touch with a "powerful organization," it would be something you'd share, anyhow.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
When you live under a tyranny and are dragged to a mosque, forced to worship facing mecca 5 times a day, and continualy mind-raped over and over and forced to believe something you can't, you would take to doing the same; using any communication medium to get your voice heard and speak out against the tyrants. It doesn't matter if they are the victims of rape, pedopilia, torture, or any other forms of tyranny.
|
I understand what you mean.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
So your statment of a person changing under pressure is irrelavent. Yes, they do. Some end up adapting to the pressure and some fight against it in anyway they can. I am obviously the latter. It's as silly as asking the persecuted chinese bloggers to quit whining about their freedom because they can't influence anbody. Yeah, they can and they are making the world know of their problems. Because not everyone leads a comfortable life with basic civil rights insured such as you.
|
Assuming I do? Although you're correct. Unfortunately.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
After the "mile-long-post" which clearly unsettled you,
|
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
you made a one-liner about me "throwing a mile long post about politics and religion." Why did you do that first? Considering that was not all aimed at anyone in particular.
|
It was more of a surprised response on how eloquent you suddenly became on the subject... as if you were waiting for a long time to express yourself.
Yeah, my "one-liner" was poorly worded, I admit.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:14 |
Have a nice holidays, Altzan. Maybe during this quiet time, you will finally think about all the people who are not as well-off as you elsewhere in the world and would finally stop whining about being insulted.
|
Firstly, thanks. I hope you do as well.
Second, go ahead and view it as whining. Perhaps it is. But a discussion laced with such obscenities isn't a worthy discussion in my book. Or a discussion at all.
| Spoony wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 09:29 |
the internet, by contrast, is great. not much censorship, much more accessible to people than the Bible used to be when the churches really had things their own way. long live e-debates!
|
Oh, I agree. Perhaps I wasn't really clear on what I meant. I just thought it wasn't as good as other websites or groups.
But as Starbuzzz said, he might have done so anyway.
I cannot imagine how the clockwork of the universe can exist without a clockmaker. ~Voltaire
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441862 is a reply to message #441851] |
Fri, 24 December 2010 21:48 |
|
Altzan
Messages: 1586
Registered: September 2008
Location: Tennessee
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| R315r4z0r wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 15:00 |
"Heated Discussions and Debates" section, while on a website intended for a video game, has absolutely nothing to do with said game. This section is for general topics.
As such, two people with opposing opinions are encouraged to post in this section.
While it might be true that winning or losing such debate on a website like this probably wont have any effect on the grander stance on the issue, that does not mean that it can't or shouldn't be discussed here period.
Saying that this is no place to discuss such a topic is merely a way of implying you don't want to argue anymore. As such, you no longer want to defend your position. But, since you also don't want to admit defeat on the issue, you're continuing to participate in the conversation.
Moral of the story: Don't enter an argument that you have no intention of finishing.
|
It was more of a "relativity" issue. I didn't mean it was pointless, although I came off that way.
Well said.
I cannot imagine how the clockwork of the universe can exist without a clockmaker. ~Voltaire
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441863 is a reply to message #441534] |
Fri, 24 December 2010 22:58 |
 |
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
I rather think that, aside from the ones that degenerate into flame-fests, some of the most informative discussions about controversial issues happen on forums not dedicated to the subject at hand. The reason is because, lacking a narrowly-defined topic, the discussion is more likely to go off on related-but-not-on-topic tangents... and people are more likely to say what's really on their minds instead of trying to sound reasonable. Nobody is afraid of being banned because they punched a prominent member's buttons... especially here. Punching peoples' buttons has been pretty much the way of life on Renforums since the bloody place came into being, even back when Westwood was running the place.
And now that I've spouted that bit of touchy-feely crap...
The fundies in here are full of shit. Sorry if I offended anybody, but... well, nobody has a right not to be offended. And that is the real heart of the issue, isn't it?
Because ultimately, that's what it all comes down to- people getting offended at the idea that something that disgusts them (homosexuality) is allowed to be shown the light of day. Yes, I'm well aware that it was considered taboo for most of human history (we have no way of knowing before history began, do we?)... but we live in a culture that accepts "get the government to ban it" as an acceptable way to hide the things that bother us. It is long past time for human society as a whole to grow the hell up and get over that shit.
I consider the issues of gay rights and censorship to be inextricably linked. Both revolve around the idea that, if the majority (or as the case may be, the minority with all the power) doesn't like something, they can make it go away. History tells us that this doesn't work- and tells us this over and over and over so many times you'd think you were listening to a broken record.
Forget about nature. It isn't about nature, or reproduction. Putting aside the fact that other species have demonstrated homosexual behavior, how many things do humans do that has nothing to do with our most basic biological purpose? How many of those things could potentially be offensive to a large and vocal minority of the population?
Now, how many of those things have any provable effect whatsoever on people who have access to, but choose not to use, participate, read, or have anything to do with those things? Whatever that very, very small number may turn out to be, homosexuality is not on the list. Being around gay people doesn't make you gay. Knowing that people are gay doesn't make you gay. Watching gay people having gay sex doesn't make you gay. So far, the only two ways to become gay are to either be born that way, or to make a conscious choice to engage in a homosexual lifestyle.
Any free society depends on the rule of liberty, not law, for its continued existence. Laws can be made and enforced in error; to deny that fact is to deny reality. The idea that a free person has the right to do as a free person will, without any interference, so long as they do not infringe upon the rights of another free person- that is fundamental. And thus we come back to the root of the issue: that, because it is so inevitable that everyone will be offended by something and there is something out there to offend everyone, no one has a right not to be offended. The fact that a person is gay may offend you, what they do may offend you, what they say may offend you... but none of that matters worth a damn.
What matters is that you would impose your will upon another free person so that you won't have to be offended by them. You are saying, in effect, that you are not the master of your own eyes- that you do not have the ability to simply look away from things that bother you, and that you do not have the courage to face them. You want the things- and the people- that bother you to be made to go away. No, you're not saying they should all be killed. You're saying that they should all be silent because you don't want to be offended. Whether it is because of your religion, or a phobia, or just a simple dislike of the mental image of two men buttfucking, ultimately you want gays to go away- by law- because you can't or won't handle the fact that they exist.
And you've got no problem with offending anyone else without realizing or caring about the hypocrisy of it all. And you know what? You've got every right to believe and say all that bunk, because the gays and gay rights advocates don't have a right not to be offended by you. But you do not have the right to impose your will as policy- and they do have the right to impose their will as policy. They have that right because their will does not infringe upon any of your rights, while your will does infringe upon theirs.
Am I getting up on my high horse? Yep. Can't deny it... because sometimes it is possible for one point of view to be right, and another to be wrong. There's no sense apologizing for that; the tides are changing. Sooner or later, humanity will get over this foolishness. I just hope I'm still alive to see that happen, at least in my own country if not the world.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441873 is a reply to message #441856] |
Sat, 25 December 2010 10:51 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Rocko wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 17:22 |
Altzan can't be serious. No one can be that dumb.
|
Par for the course in Tennessee.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #441876 is a reply to message #441873] |
Sat, 25 December 2010 14:28 |
|
Altzan
Messages: 1586
Registered: September 2008
Location: Tennessee
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Sat, 25 December 2010 11:51 |
| Rocko wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 17:22 |
Altzan can't be serious. No one can be that dumb.
|
Par for the course in Tennessee.
|
?
I cannot imagine how the clockwork of the universe can exist without a clockmaker. ~Voltaire
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #442022 is a reply to message #441876] |
Fri, 31 December 2010 09:55 |
|
Starbuzzz
Messages: 1637
Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Altzan wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 13:11 |
Your post earlier was not even close to neutral.
|
There is something incredibly odd about a christian demanding neutrality. In any issue. PERIOD.
| Altzan wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 13:11 |
Your belief on how homosexuals should be treated is indeed an opinion.
|
| Altzan wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 13:11 |
Your belief on how blacks should be treated is indeed an opinion.
|
| Altzan wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 13:11 |
Your belief on how women should be treated is indeed an opinion.
|
No, it isn't. See what I did there? Here is a fine example of what dogmatic religious indoctrination from a religion such as christianity can do to a person. It's sad we have to deal with people like this every generation for needless problems that we get over in the next generation.
We actually have a concept now of basic "human rights" that didn't exist when abraham's god was busy giving those despicable commandantments in Deutronomy such as ordering those who don't worship "him" to be taken out of the camp to be killed and giving out the correct guidelines for using slaves (wow).
Thousands of years later after "he" gave these commandments, what do we see? We see that the absolute rules from such a power-crazed man-made god is not absolute afterall and humanity as a whole have rejected those idiotic rules (thru many struggles).
If such a god did forbid the use of slaves and promoted the concept that all humans have some form of basic rights, the religion would be growing, not shamefully dying as a laughingstock as it is. Our morals today are lightyears ahead of what the judeo-christian god came up with and it will be ever better as we move into the future.
@Nuke: hotly-condensed and very effective post right there. While eveything you said makes sense to anyone not clouded by religious indoctination, this is the part that is the mental blocker:
| NukeIt15 wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 23:58 |
But you do not have the right to impose your will as policy- and they do have the right to impose their will as policy. They have that right because their will does not infringe upon any of your rights, while your will does infringe upon theirs.
|
From strong personal experience, it is extremely difficult for a religiously indoctrinated person to understand this. ^
The religious have 1 gold standard, i.e, the instructions of their god are absolute and CORRECT. Nobody can challenge it and add or take away from it and abolutely nobody can void it. This by itself is hypocritical considering the wide range of biblical laws that they conveneintly ignore because it will be too stupid to follow them now!
The other standard they see (which is our basic constantly evolving commonsense as the human journey continues) is what they automatically demonize as "ways of the world," "wickedness of the lost" and other drivel. This is a pure isolationist self-deceiving way of looking at our progress (which they ridicule).
So that is the absolute root of the problem and the challenge we get from the dogmatically indoctrinated. So no matter how often and how hard we repeat that, the religious find it very hard to accept it. You explained very well with the homosexuals example but no matter how much, their gold standard is there so they have incredible mental difficulty to accept that "allright, he is a homosexual and I find him disgusting but he is not doing anything whatsoever to hurt me and so I should fuck off." Instead, they feel compelled to act to stop it proving the power trip nature of their quest.
This just shows the man-made nature of the religion and its use for pure purposes of control and power. If christians actually cared for the souls of the homosexuals (thy don't cos that's was bullshit from day 1), they won't be pathetically pleading to "enforce the 1993 law banning homosexuals from serving in the military" in a equally pathetic voter guide. They would be instead reaching out and pleading with compassion to try to change them (very few do this). It shows how in the end, it is all about trying to forcefully conform everyone to their standard so they can just sleep tight at night knowing they don't have to worry about facing reality. This probably defines the word, "pathetic."
-----
I have read countless christian bloggers who, like that lunatic's blog Pyr0 linked to, are convinced that we are headed to moral decay in the issue of homosexuality and generally into the future.
Funny thing is, if I were half-honest, I would admit "moral decay" was at it's height during biblical times and many times directly precipitated by the the judeo-christian god (mass-killing children anyone?). The bible stories aside, thousands of years before biblical chastity grasped the collective human mind thousands of years ago as christian replaced then-exisitng religions in western lands, women were just sex slaves. They were like property, infact even the judeo-christian god put women (wife) as not to be coveted in the last of the ten commandments along with the rest of the things not to be coveted! Showed where things stood then.
Kings grabbed any attractive females they saw and had thousands of sex slaves (innocently named as "concubines" in the bible). Humans were handled like animals as slaves. If this was the norm then, why bitch about where we are headed now? You see so many bible nuts whine about how "sex is becoming more and more casual, oh noes!" and "how the world is becoming dangerous!"...these idiots should take a look at history and see how it has been constantly changing. Yes, sex is more recreational now (and so?) but atleast now it is widely consensual and much safer as opposed to what amounted to sadistic kidnap-rape in biblical times.
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #442030 is a reply to message #442022] |
Fri, 31 December 2010 16:05 |
|
Altzan
Messages: 1586
Registered: September 2008
Location: Tennessee
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 10:55 |
There is something incredibly odd about a christian demanding neutrality. In any issue. PERIOD.
|
How cute.
Is that the best counter you came up with?
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 10:55 |
Changing quotes is fun!
|
Nice try.
Don't drag the "right and wrong" aspect into it, buddy - it wasn't my point, not by a long shot.
My point stands as thus:
| Quote: |
Your belief on how homosexuals should be treated is indeed an opinion.
|
And you have yet to prove it false.
I cannot imagine how the clockwork of the universe can exist without a clockmaker. ~Voltaire
|
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #442036 is a reply to message #442030] |
Fri, 31 December 2010 19:06 |
|
Starbuzzz
Messages: 1637
Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Altzan wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 17:05 |
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 10:55 |
There is something incredibly odd about a christian demanding neutrality. In any issue. PERIOD.
|
Is that the best counter you came up with?
|
You are raging about how I hurt your feelings by speaking my mind on a crucial issue while you are ready to crush and oppress people into behaving the way you want them to by supporting/favouring laws that are made to control and oppress people to your liking.
Still whining about how my "post didn't even come close to neutral?" Take a wild guess.
| Altzan wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 17:05 |
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 10:55 |
Changing quotes is fun!
|
Nice try.
|
My point went flying over your head.
| Altzan wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 17:05 |
Don't drag the "right and wrong" aspect into it, buddy - it wasn't my point, not by a long shot.
|
You are going to have to try a lot harder to worm out of this one, rookie. Besides "right and wrong" which you are so quick to pull out of and deny here (!!!), most importantly and foremost, it's a issue of "will you mind your own business and allow people to be themselves" or "will you continue to intrude into the personal
lives and life choices of others." The choice should be VERY easy considering they (homosexuals) have done NO WRONG TO YOU.
| Altzan wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 17:05 |
My point stands as thus:
| Quote: |
Your belief on how homosexuals should be treated is indeed an opinion.
|
And you have yet to prove it false.
|
No, that is most certainly NOT your point. Did you think it's going to be this easy? Your dishonest statement of "your belief on how homosexuals should be treated is indeed an opinion" is a cunningly veiled translation of "I have a right to tell people (homosexuals) how to behave and will use the law to make them comply; and what anyone else says including yourself doesn't matter because it is only your opinion and a belief."
And now you are demanding me to disprove this absurdity?!
If you think you can hide behind such a wretched statement using words like "your opinion" and "belief" and think it will do your side any good...well, no it doesn't. We went thru this SAME word-play dishonesty in the Catholic debate thread.
It's extremely alarming to see such a dishonest religiously-intoxicated individual put the crucial civil rights issue of how certain people should be treated in the same sentence with "belief" and "an opinion."
Very dangerous times indeed. You only give me hyper-encouragement for fighting for the civil rights of those oppressed by the likes of short-sighted, history-denying individuals like yourself.
You have yet to counter any 1 single pro-homosexual argument presented here so far, not even having the decency to make a first point as to WHY these laws should be in place. Yet you demand disprovement for a lame one-liner which has already been destroyed over and over.
In the meantime, you continue to ignore the exponential historical irrelavency of your entire belief system (as well as any other competing belief system) as pointed out here repeatedly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| pulling in and out again... [message #442039 is a reply to message #441534] |
Fri, 31 December 2010 22:29 |
Muad Dib15
Messages: 839
Registered: July 2007
Location: behind a computer screen,...
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Imo: this whole debate is somewhat moot. Gays have been allowed to openly serve in the military whether some people like it or not. Personally I would have preferred DADT, with the clause inserted that if someone is 3rd person outed they shouldn't have been kicked out, as it should have been quite effective at getting rid of the the Gay community complaints* about wanting to be able to serve in the military and not have to lie about being straight in order to do so. I have absolutely 0 problems with that, everyone should be able to serve our country in the military if they qualify physically and mentally.
However, DADT advocates are now being called bigots and homophobes for defending DADT. Yet before, they would have been called a bigot or homophobe for not wanting gays in the military at all*. Funny how when the right side of the political spectrum decides to compromise, which may not have been the case then it is now though, the left seems to want to continue pushing their agenda under the guise of equal rights. It's not the fight for equal rights, it is elevating a minority over the majority. Now because of this, homosexuals that have been passed up for a promotion, demoted, dishonorably discharged, left on the field injured for whatever reason, etc. can now claim that is was because they were gay that what happened to them happened. I know most of them will not do that, but there are some who will.
And on this note, let me also state that I'm for civil unions or something along those lines replacing marriage in the state's eyes and allowing religion to keep their version of marriage. If this makes me a bigot for not believing in gay marriage, you've got a huge problem. Tl:dr(not really)==> Churches can call marriages marriages. They'll have their right to. But in the eyes of the law, straight/gay/etc should be called a civil union, or mmarriage, or commonlaw, or anything else other than marriage. The religious connotation stays for the churches that wish to continue that tradition, and in the eyes of the law, everybody is equal and nothing is separate. And if you have churches that allow marriages of homosexual couples, then great, the homosexual couples can be a part of -those churches-.
Also on a slightly humorous note: Think of the pinups girls on the walls. Do you really think that gays aren't going to participate in that longstanding army tradition? They will put guy pinups which in all honesty no straight guy wants to see. Which means that someone will tear it down, the guy who had it will get butt hurt over it and as a result pinup girl and guy posters are banned. no one is happy.
*best wording I can come up with atm
The manliest post on the internet
[Updated on: Fri, 31 December 2010 22:29] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: don't ask don't tell [message #442041 is a reply to message #442036] |
Fri, 31 December 2010 23:35 |
|
Altzan
Messages: 1586
Registered: September 2008
Location: Tennessee
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Sheesh. Only one part of your reply is even worth touching, since you refuse to stop trying to drag me into conversations I want no part with.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 20:06 |
You are raging
|
Really, now.
It's obvious you're raging a lot more than I am.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 20:06 |
about how I hurt your feelings
|
Not really.
| Starbuzzz wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 20:06 |
while you are ready to crush and oppress people into behaving the way you want them to by supporting/favouring laws that are made to control and oppress people to your liking.
|
Quote me where I said I support those laws. Go on.
I cannot imagine how the clockwork of the universe can exist without a clockmaker. ~Voltaire
|
|
|
|
| Re: pulling in and out again... [message #442050 is a reply to message #442039] |
Sat, 01 January 2011 10:50 |
 |
nikki6ixx
Messages: 2545
Registered: August 2007
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Muad Dib15 wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 23:29 |
Also on a slightly humorous note: Think of the pinups girls on the walls. Do you really think that gays aren't going to participate in that longstanding army tradition? They will put guy pinups which in all honesty no straight guy wants to see. Which means that someone will tear it down, the guy who had it will get butt hurt over it and as a result pinup girl and guy posters are banned. no one is happy.
|
Yeah, and I'm sure women who serve aren't terribly enthusiastic about pinup chicks either. Besides, gay dudes aren't into that stuff, and they don't care.
So yeah, it's entirely fair to ban pinup posters if straight dudes bitch about seeing men more attractive than them on the wall. Gay people are portrayed as being effeminate girls, and yet it seems in this debate, it's the straight people who are being the total c#nts.
Renegade:
| Aircraftkiller wrote on Fri, 10 January 2014 16:56 |
The only game where everyone competes to be an e-janitor.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: pulling in and out again... [message #442207 is a reply to message #442039] |
Wed, 05 January 2011 11:43 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Muad Dib15 wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 21:29 |
Imo:
|
dgaf
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Dec 23 07:15:26 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01658 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
