Gay Rights

I know this is a big point with you, so I'll ask. What is your definition of honesty. Because mine is telling the truth, not lying, etc. I don't lie, and I tell the truth as I see it.

So let's get this straight. You're problem with me is that's I'm 'dishonest'. You think this because I strawman you (provide examples, a claim without evidence can be easily refuted without evidence), and that I nitpick, and that I don't respond to the points that you make in an attempt to derail the conversation. '

In your edit, you state that dat_coffee and I are fraudulent in our arguments, and then you state perfectly why I don't respond to your entire post. Usually, half of it has no relevance to what I've said. But instead of getting frustrated, I ignore the parts that don't matter, and respond to the parts that do.

We're more the same than you realize. We're both so stubborn we won't admit when we're wrong. We both believe we're always right. Really, the biggest difference is that I admit it, and you don't. Really, you're the dishonest one.

 

hehehehe

 

It's reall hard to reply on my phone lol. Just pretend I'm only referencing your last paragraph. So you believe that I can be reasoned with, but it isn't worth the time or effort to do so, right? This is an honest question, and all I want is a simple answer.

 

That it would take way too long, given what I've seen already.

Example:

A) You claim that God is nowhere near as bad as Satan, but is "as bad" as Hitler, citing death count. B) You claim that Jesus are God are the same person.

B) is only true for particular denominations of Christians, and is not representative of Xtianity as a whole, or even most Xtians. That one is crystal clear. You have still not addressed this.

A) I refute, explaining that reasons why you commit murder are what governs the morality of the action. Churchill was responsible for many deaths too, but we don't speak of him in the same way we speak of Hitler.

You dismiss this criticism, by claiming (I think?) that I'm committing the 'False Equivalency' fallacy. Comparing genocide, to military action. You accuse me of constructing a dishonest argument.

Again, this raises yet another problem. Genocide and military action are not mutually exclusive. Regardless, you just committed the same 'mistake' by comparing the actions of the Biblical god, and Hitler. So either we're both wrong to do so, and your entire argument falls down before it's even got out the gate, or we're both right to compare the two and my criticism is valid.

You finish, by reminding me that we should be talking about gays and gay-rights. You do not respond to any of the points above.

I'm not prepared to go through this rigmarole every time you straw-man or accuse me of dishonesty, when you yourself are folly of the thing you're accusing me for! It's tiring, and there are better, more worth causes for me to devote my 'debating-time' to, that this one. I mean, for the most part, we're on the page on a lot of things. I feel like you're taking Coffee's approach and playing Devils Advocate sometimes. Though that's just conjecture and a tad presumptuous. So no-one should give much credence to that.

You really do argue like a lawyer. I'm quite relieved that you mentioned that. Feels like a huge weight off my shoulders. The only way I'll find myself re-engaging with you specifically, is if we disagreed on something substantive (and that had a significant impact either way). Whereas I've sworn off 'Coffee' for life until he stops arguing positions he isn't truly behind.

 

Hahahaha! That is NOT confirmation bias. Wow. Dude, if you're going to try and school someone based on your conjecture, at least do a quick google search of what you're talking about.

Confirmation Bias is 'Counting the hits, and not counting the misses'. Popular with self-proclaimed psychics and problem gamblers.

What you're talking about, is 'Denial'. They're not one and the same thing. Close? ISH? But you're talking about the wrong thing, bud.

The funny thing is, you're actually the one committing the 'Confirmation Bias' fallacy. You're only looking at a few conversations where I've refused to engage any further, while ignoring or not accounting for the one in which I do. Not only that, but you completely ignore the reasons I've given for refusing to engage.

I tell you what, big man. Let's give you another shot. Take 2? Have another crack at it? Go onnnnnn, have a go!

--- Double Post Merged, Aug 23, 2015, Original Post Date: Aug 23, 2015 ---

Also, I never said that 'One's arguments don't matter, because you're playing devils advocate'. Not once. You're straw-manning.

I'm aware that the claims made are not affected by the individual making them.

I don't want to engage with you, because you're already admitted that you don't argue honestly. You even admit that on your profile. And I consider it a waste of my time, when I could debate other people on important subjects that WILL argue honestly. That won't potentially give me the run around because they love disagreeing and debating for their own sake. I don't. I disagree and debate to change minds, and to have my own mind changed. You don't fit the bill here. THAT is why you're not worthy of any more of my time.

 

*Waits for it to click...*

Read the reasons I cited above. Your arguments may or may not be valid. I don't know, nor do I want to know. Because you're wasting my time. I'd rather engage with people who argue honestly and genuinely believe what they're arguing.

I do so to change minds and have mine changed. I don't want to be convinced of potentially bad positions just because someone was bored and wanted to play DA. Likewise, I'm completely wasting my time arguing against someone that may already agree with me.

 

I'm glad you know my mind better than I do. Phew.

Hey, did you know that the James Randi Educational Foundation has a $1m prize for demonstrating if you have psychic powers. You should soooooooooo totally go for it!

In the past few years, I've changed my mind on.... Free-will, Vegetarianism, the way one should conduct themselves in conversations/disagreements, gun-control, drug legislation... and I'm pretty sure there are a few others. Those are the big ones, anyway.

But hey, I'm a stubborn mule, right?

 

Ok, that was longer than necessary. So, hypothetically, if someone knew this, they would be justified in telling you it wouldn't be worth it to engage with me, or do you disagree?

 

God made everyone a certain way and there are males and females. So let males be males and females be females, I HIGHLY DISAGREE that our government has made it ok to have gay marriages or anything like that, my opinion is that it is just stupid. But I mean we have a choice and my choice is to not follow anything like that. But I will love everybody with Gods love. (1 Peter 3:9) Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult. On the contrary repay evil with blessing because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing.

 

Well apparently God messed up when he made gay people.

 

That completely depends on how much time that individual wants to spend on conversations, doesn't it? We all have our 'line'. I've set my bar, everyone else can set theirs.

But yes, if they're short on time, I think they would be justified.

As said, big topics? With consequences? I'm still game. Not ones like this though. I'm mentally exhausted and tired of the bait 'n' switch, dismissals, yatta yatta yatta.

Oh, and it is worth stating that I would be free to engage with you on any topic whatsoever if these things were addressed. If you went back and conceded or readdressed certain points. I want to make it clear that I'm not refusing you the opportunity to engage forever. People change, we learn, and heck? I might think I was being an ass here, at some point in the future and I may want to rescind these statements. I find it unlikely, but... you never know.

--- Double Post Merged, Aug 23, 2015, Original Post Date: Aug 23, 2015 ---

So they have a choice, but you don't think they should have a choice? How does that work?

Didn't god make gays too? What about gay animals? (Sakros for the assist)

Do you follow every word in the Bible? If so, do you condone slavery, like your god does? If not, why only some parts and not others?

 

To be quite honest, we really don't need to dig too deep into any of this (I know it's tempting). I don't even think we need to get into how being gay isn't a choice. People just need to understand that religion shouldn't determine law. :/

 

Alright, so someone wouldn't be out of line is they recommended that a second party not engage a third party?

 

Oops mest up on the one above this

 

There's a delete button.
Edit: And an edit button.

 

It totally is a choice like i said we all have a choice.

 

Is disliking pain a choice? I know you won't understand this at your age, but sex drive is also not a choice. It just is.

 

Well you can believe what you want to believe. I'll still love everybody with Gods love.

 

You stole God's love so you can use it on other people?