LGBTQ Fascists, again...

[carpedm9587]

Bravo on your posts so far. However, do you notice how quickly those who cannot actually provide a rational answer for their views quickly resort to personal remarks?

'Twas ever thus.

I would be less than honest if I did not acknowledge that I too descended into the muck in previous incarnations on TWeb. There is something about this place, or perhaps the people that frequent it, that seems to invite ad homs, and demeaning/condescending comments about others. It's unfortunate. However, I accepted that as a likely outcome when I made the decision to come back and engage again. I think I am pretty firmly in the "I cannot control what others say/do, only what I say/do" and "what others say to/about me does not reflect who/what I am; only what I say/do can reflect that" seat, but we will see. If I find myself sliding back into "that space," I'll take my leave again and go do some more personal work.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I would be less than honest if I did not acknowledge that I too descended into the muck in previous incarnations on TWeb. There is something about this place, or perhaps the people that frequent it, that seems to invite ad homs, and demeaning/condescending comments about others. It's unfortunate. However, I accepted that as a likely outcome when I made the decision to come back and engage again. I think I am pretty firmly in the "I cannot control what others say/do, only what I say/do" and "what others say to/about me does not reflect who/what I am; only what I say/do can reflect that" seat, but we will see. If I find myself sliding back into "that space," I'll take my leave again and go do some more personal work.

An honest and very wise reply. Once again, Bravo.

[Cow Poke]

Because I hold a different view?

And it seems to be getting differenter all the time.

How do you know it is me rather than you that has been assimilated?

Because I live on the Mountain of Right, and you live in the Valley of Wrong -- everybody knows that!

(The above is said in jest - I disagree with Carpe, but I would still enjoy sharing a meal with the guy)

[Cow Poke]

An honest and very wise reply. Once again, Bravo.

Perhaps you should strive to be more like him!

[carpedm9587]

Feel free to actually click the link. If you don't know the shorthand for the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,, then idk what to say but your claim that your familiarity with critical theory is completely erroneous.

Oops.. I clicked the first link, which took me to Wikipedia. Thanks for the explanation on SEP. I have now visited the other two (albeit a brief scan only). They don't disagree with other things I have read, so I'm fine with SEP.

I never said I was quoting Berkeley and my quoting Wiki was in response to Star doing the same. You seriously can't follow quote links or conversations can you?

The SEP linked the old page, I merely gave both.

Then you don't understand the genetic fallacy. But, as long as we're naming fallacies, fallacy fallacy.

The genetic fallacy, Dio, is when a thing is claimed to be true/false on the basis of its source. You appear to be making the claim that CT is good/bad on the basis of its roots in Marxism, which is like in kind. If not, why continually emphasize the Marxist roots of the philosophy?

Critical theory and its variants are dubious in their own right.

Then you will have to explain how, "examining social and legal frameworks for vestiges of injustice and exposing them," is a bad thing.

Marxism and its variants have no interest in actual justice. It's simply about deconstruction so the revolutionaries recreating a world where they have the power.

I find your reduction of Marxism, a complex and extensive philosophy, to a single throw-away sentence overly simplistic and dismissive. You cannot meaningfully capture a philosophy that spans centuries and has been extensively explored and written about in thousands of texts to a single throw-away line.

I would suggest looking into James Lindsay and Peter Boghossian if you want a breakdown of critical theory. There would be some schadenfreude regarding atheists bemoaning the replacements of Christianity that they sought to destroy if the results weren't so destructive.

I think I prefer to do my research from less polarized sources, but thanks. And I have no idea how that last sentence relates to the discussion at hand.

You appear to be easily duped by linguistics niceties.

Your assessment is noted.

[carpedm9587]

And it seems to be getting differenter all the time.

That is likely true. As I get older, I find that many of the things that held me back in the exploration and expression of my views simply no longer apply. There is a certain freedom in that.

Because I live on the Mountain of Right, and you live in the Valley of Wrong -- everybody knows that!

(The above is said in jest - I disagree with Carpe, but I would still enjoy sharing a meal with the guy)

Likewise, and jest accepted. But I believe you have the Valley and Mountain reversed. After all, the offal typically flows to the lowest point.

(yeah, I know, I know. You're pretty sure you had it right to begin with, for the same reason!)

ETA: You know, I'm going to be passing through Texas (again) in the late fall. I am now a full-time RVer. Where would I have to pass to be in driving distance for said meal?

[Diogenes]

Bravo on your posts so far. However, do you notice how quickly those who cannot actually provide a rational answer for their views quickly resort to personal remarks?

'Twas ever thus.

Like suggesting people are from different countries or that they hold neo-Nazi positions or bewilder psychologists?


You are not without resorting to personal remarks as well.

[CivilDiscourse]

Like suggesting people are from different countries or that they hold neo-Nazi positions or bewilder psychologists?


You are not without resorting to personal remarks as well.

Her personal remarks are better because she doesn't use "schoolyard" or "puerile" comments when she insults people. She makes high class insults!

[Cow Poke]

That is likely true. As I get older, I find that many of the things that held me back in the exploration and expression of my views simply no longer apply. There is a certain freedom in that.



Likewise, and jest accepted. But I believe you have the Valley and Mountain reversed. After all, the offal typically flows to the lowest point.

(yeah, I know, I know. You're pretty sure you had it right to begin with, for the same reason!)

ETA: You know, I'm going to be passing through Texas (again) in the late fall. I am now a full-time RVer. Where would I have to pass to be in driving distance for said meal?

Somewhere between Houston and Austin off Hwy 290.

And, just for grins, the "Mountain of Right" concept was stolen by me from Fridays with Frank where he (a Deputy Sheriff with Pinal County, Arizona) deals with people trying to tell him what the law is with regards to traffic stops.

He will also tell a motorist, "no, sir, you're speaking from the Pulpit of Misknowledge".

[rogue06]

Why do we need LGBTQSRKLMN++++ curriculum in schools in the first place when we can't even teach reading, 'riting and 'rithmatic?

Because public skewlz have little interest in teaching children how to think because they're concentrating instead on telling them what to think.

[Cow Poke]

Because public skewlz have little interest in teaching children how to think because they're concentrating instead on telling them what to think.

Ours is being transformed as we speak.
WHO KNEW that, just 1 and a half years ago, I was "at war" with the School Board, and now they are totally irrelevant because I'm best buds with the New Superintendent!

(Had a meeting yesterday with some of his top staff, ALL of whom expressed deep gratitude for my role in getting the prior Super "excommunicated")

[seer]

A "lie" is an intentional statement made to deceive. It implies intent on the part of the speaker/writer to deceive. The third symbol on the gingerbread man represents hermaphrodites, a small but real group that does not conform to simple male/female dichotomy (i.e., they possess the primary and secondary characteristics of both sexes). The world is not simply XX and XY, Seer. There are such things as trisomes, quadsomes, and quintsomes. There are characteristics that are normally associated with the X chromosome that migrate to the Y (and the reverse). We all start life (first 6-7 weeks of gestation) as phenotypically female. Only after that does the expression of a gene on the Y chromosome induce changes that result in the development of the testes. If the signals that trigger that change are compromised, the results is a compromised sexual identity. Genetics is not the neat/tidy world of Mendel's experiments.

The symbol on the GenderBread man is correct, though I would have preferred, though it could be misleading to some (i.e., the size of the symbols is the same, but the hermaphrodite population is substantially smaller. On the other hand, a smaller logo can also be interpreted to suggest "lesser significance/importance" rather than "smaller population," which is probably why they are the same size).

There is no lle here, and I do not condone lying.

What exactly is the THIRD sex Carp? As as I can see we have two sexes and physical abnormities. There is no third sex.

[carpedm9587]

Somewhere between Houston and Austin off Hwy 290.

And, just for grins, the "Mountain of Right" concept was stolen by me from Fridays with Frank where he (a Deputy Sheriff with Pinal County, Arizona) deals with people trying to tell him what the law is with regards to traffic stops.

He will also tell a motorist, "no, sir, you're speaking from the Pulpit of Misknowledge".

Ahhh.. the infamous "pulpit of misknowledge," installed in every church in the world!

(sorry, as an atheist, I just could NOT resist).

The locale is noted. I will be north of Lake Texoma possibly heading south towards San Antonio sometime in December. That would take me right through Austin. It is also possible I will go from Texoma to Midland, which would not. That decision should be made in the next few weeks.

[Diogenes]

Oops.. I clicked the first link, which took me to Wikipedia. Thanks for the explanation on SEP. I have now visited the other two (albeit a brief scan only). They don't disagree with other things I have read, so I'm fine with SEP.

I never said they did disagree, merely pointed out that CT's links to Marxism isn't limited to revisionary Wiki.

The genetic fallacy, Dio, is when a thing is claimed to be true/false on the basis of its source. You appear to be making the claim that CT is good/bad on the basis of its roots in Marxism, which is like in kind. If not, why continually emphasize the Marxist roots of the philosophy?

First, fallacy fallacy. Second, I emphasize its roots because CT is just lipstick on a pig. It's merely an extension of Marx's bourgeoisie culture.

Then you will have to explain how, "examining social and legal frameworks for vestiges of injustice and exposing them," is a bad thing.

You keep saying you're familiar with critical theory and yet you merely repeat the veneer.

I find your reduction of Marxism, a complex and extensive philosophy, to a single throw-away sentence overly simplistic and dismissive. You cannot meaningfully capture a philosophy that spans centuries and has been extensively explored and written about in thousands of texts to a single throw-away line.

For the purposes of Tweb, I can and do. You've shown you're not actually interested in discourse so there's no reason to be serious.

I'm actually somewhat sympathetic to Marx both in his context of the Industrial Revolution and in general. The problem though is that he wasn't interested in the proletariat as he leeched off their exploited labor. He and his students are only interested in destruction and power. I also don't believe the State should be made a deity.

I treat people as they present themselves. Unlike you, I don't have the time that allows me to go state to state interfering in sections. I'm not on all day and I'm typically on my phone when I am.

I think I prefer to do my research from less polarized sources, but thanks.

You seem to consider opposition as "polarized" sources.

And I have no idea how that last sentence relates to the discussion at hand.

'Twas merely an observation given the figures mentioned and recent comments by Richard Dawkins.

[Cow Poke]

Ahhh.. the infamous "pulpit of misknowledge," installed in every church in the world!

(sorry, as an atheist, I just could NOT resist).

Totally understandable, and it did warrant an audible laugh.

The locale is noted. I will be north of Lake Texoma possibly heading south towards San Antonio sometime in December. That would take me right through Austin. It is also possible I will go from Texoma to Midland, which would not. That decision should be made in the next few weeks.

Lemme know - and, perhaps H_A can see that, even though we are on polar opposite ends of pretty much any measurable scale out there, we can be 'pals', as she would say.