This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Ginger
Pages: 1 ... 456 78 ... 11
151
« on: November 25, 2015, 10:02:54 AM »
okay what is with this website and gingers
Gingers are like unicorns or something.
152
« on: November 25, 2015, 09:52:47 AM »
Ginger is quite spectacular.
Fixed. And thank you!
153
« on: November 24, 2015, 03:47:16 PM »
The thought that "Oh engaging in dialogue with this group whose views I disagree with or offend me is useless and not worth trying. We should just censor them instead." It's this idea that people have never had their views changed through hearing views which conflict with their own. Rather than us make an attempt to help these people understand the fallacies of their beliefs let us silence them through force.
If dissuasion through dialogue fails, though it has changed people's views many times in the past, the last step should be complete social ostracism. You say it won't dissuade people from their beliefs, and that may be true in many cases, but if someone is that deeply rooted in their beliefs what makes you think legality of that belief will influence them? You can't kill ideas and there still remains no empirical evidence of state sanctioned censorship being effective.
You are now exaggerating and misinterpreting my view. I speak with people who think differently than me all the time, but there is a point when the dialogue becomes pointless because it goes absolutely no where. Talking in circles is pointless. I am not suggesting that they be silenced by force. However, I am saying that certain ideas should not be given a platform to spread their socially unacceptable violence and deviance. A perfect example is the shutting down of social media accounts of people tied to terrorist organizations. This is done to limit the platforms these groups use to spread their ideas. I support this type of action, do you? I do not even know what is being discussed at this point because we are using the same arguments for two different view points. You support dialogue, but then say an idea cannot be killed, which is what I said myself. Do I think a state should be able to blanket censor at will? No. Do I think that certain types of censorship are acceptable? Yes, moral censorship and the censorship of sensitive information is also commonplace; examples being child pornography, 30 year rule on reading certain EU internal documents, same rule on sensitive U.S. documents (some documents fall under a 50-100 year rule). I appreciate your point of view, and I fully agree with you on some aspects, but I do not think we are actually talking about the same thing throughout this text.
154
« on: November 24, 2015, 03:01:15 PM »
And that action, carried out by the level-headed and moderate majority population, should be discourse and dialogue aimed at deradicalizing and moderating people that hold such thoughts. Not state sanctioned censorship and persecution.
As nice as it is to think that creating a dialogue with people who think a certain way will actually amount to something, in many instances, it does not. We may gain a better understanding of what they believe and why they believe it, but it does not do much to dissuade someone from their belief. Current events are a perfect example.
155
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:54:30 PM »
There is no evidence to suggest that censorship works. Just because it has been implemented in Europe for several decades does not translate into something that can be interpreted as 'successful.' Drug criminalization has also been around for quite a while but that does not necessarily mean it has worked, or provided any benefits since its implementation.
I'm talking about any form of censorship. Here are some articles for you to look through: Suicide in Films: The Impact of Suicide Portrayals on Nonsuicidal Viewers' Well‐Being and the Effectiveness of Censorship; B Till, T Niederkrotenthaler, A Herberth Correlates of support for censorship of sexual, sexually violent, and violent media; RD Fisher, IJ Cook, EC Shirkey Sex, lies, and video compact disc a case study on third-person perception and motivations for media censorship; SC Chia, KH Lu, DM McLeod
156
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:43:40 PM »
Pretty sceptical of the outcomes of these surveys as those responses can mean quite a few things.
Such as?
Pretty big difference between opposing someone's ability to criticise minorities and the harm some of their beliefs and practices might cause for our society on the one hand, and thinking that it should not be legal for people to publicly proclaim that all immigrants are filthy subhuman mudslime niggers who should be round up and eradicated.
I personally don't think the state should be able to limit free speech in either case.
Question. For anyone really...
If a man was standing on a street corner talking about how attracted he is to 6-9 year old girls, how much they turn him on and what have you, would it be okay for the police to arrest him? Would it be okay for him to then be put under surveillance for expressing his sexual desires?
Until he provides further evidence of intent or actually commits the act, no.
Would what he said be enough evidence to put him under investigation?
I don't think so but pedophilia is such another larger issue. This boils down less to "should he have the right to say these things without arrest" and more to "if someone expresses interest in pedopholia they should be physiologically treated and helped with that problem not condemned and prosecuted."
So with our current system of condemnation and persecution do I think he should be put under investigation for simpley expressing that he is indeed attracted to children?
No not until he is found in possession of child porn, explicitly expresses specific intent to commit an sexual act upon a child, or actually commits a sexual act upon a child.
In my imagined system of rehabilitation for pedophiles do I think he should be evaluated for treatment and help of pedopholia for expressing sexual attraction to children?
Yes
It is all part of a larger issue. The fact of the matter is that expressing violent, deviant or abnormal thoughts is enough to justify some amount of intervention/investigation. A government could not protect its people if it did not take those statements seriously.
157
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:34:29 PM »
"I do not have evidence to substantiate my claims so I'm going to waffle several paragraphs that don't really get us anywhere intellectually."
Wew lad.
You have kinda done the same thing over the past few pages. This topic is really a matter of opinion. There is research showing support for and against censorship on varying levels. You may not like the idea of censorship, but it has been a part of your life forever. You experience it on a daily basis and it is probably largely overlooked.
158
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:28:40 PM »
Pretty sceptical of the outcomes of these surveys as those responses can mean quite a few things.
Such as?
Pretty big difference between opposing someone's ability to criticise minorities and the harm some of their beliefs and practices might cause for our society on the one hand, and thinking that it should not be legal for people to publicly proclaim that all immigrants are filthy subhuman mudslime niggers who should be round up and eradicated.
I personally don't think the state should be able to limit free speech in either case.
Question. For anyone really...
If a man was standing on a street corner talking about how attracted he is to 6-9 year old girls, how much they turn him on and what have you, would it be okay for the police to arrest him? Would it be okay for him to then be put under surveillance for expressing his sexual desires?
Until he provides further evidence of intent or actually commits the act, no.
Would what he said be enough evidence to put him under investigation?
159
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:27:12 PM »
I actually cannot cast a vote. I am an American now living in a country that has compulsory voting. However, I am not a citizen, and thus cannot vote. Another however, I never voted while living in the U.S. because I strongly oppose the American political system. So I am inclined to disagree. Third however, the country I live in has more political parties and the social issues of the U.S. are non-issues here, so we will have to see.
160
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:14:38 PM »
Leaving a gift receipt is normal. You are not supposed to leave the actual receipt though as it shows the price.
161
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:11:04 PM »
Pretty sceptical of the outcomes of these surveys as those responses can mean quite a few things.
Such as?
Pretty big difference between opposing someone's ability to criticise minorities and the harm some of their beliefs and practices might cause for our society on the one hand, and thinking that it should not be legal for people to publicly proclaim that all immigrants are filthy subhuman mudslime niggers who should be round up and eradicated.
I personally don't think the state should be able to limit free speech in either case.
Question. For anyone really... If a man was standing on a street corner talking about how attracted he is to 6-9 year old girls, how much they turn him on and what have you, would it be okay for the police to arrest him? Would it be okay for him to then be put under surveillance for expressing his sexual desires?
162
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:35:45 PM »
safe-sex.
what
You made the point in your initial response of too high maintenance. It taught people how difficult it was to raise a babby, let alone an electronic pet.
163
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:32:18 PM »
Tamagotchi.
they were cool, but
too high-maintenance
They had a two-fold purpose. Teaching responsibility and safe-sex.
164
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:29:49 PM »
Tamagotchi.
165
« on: November 24, 2015, 10:27:44 AM »
The ghost of fucking Christmas future.
That is priceless. I actually laughed out loud. Kudos!
166
« on: November 24, 2015, 10:21:06 AM »
Hiya!
167
« on: November 21, 2015, 03:23:19 PM »
One of the mods likes to spank me quite often.
168
« on: November 21, 2015, 03:16:58 PM »
Ieper was never taken. Nice testament to the will of the people. I want to go there.
169
« on: November 21, 2015, 02:59:15 PM »
My views have not changed, but I now live somewhere that I am surrounded by people who do not think my views on the world are weird.
170
« on: November 21, 2015, 02:36:32 PM »
"Perched over Brussels stands the massive Palace of Justice, once a shining monument to democratic values, now cloaked for decades in scaffolding so decrepit it has come to symbolize Belgium's neglect for law and order. "
The Palace of Justice always has scaffolding up because it is constantly under construction. This is not because it symbolizes Belgium's neglect for law and order, but that it is the largest court in the world so once they complete one section they have to renovate another.
Yeah I thought that line was quite facetious and unsubstantiated. I think it was just their poor attempt at an analogy of sorts.
I think the analogy in question was a comparison of the scaffolding surrounding the PoJ to be a visual representation of the political and legal dissent between the two autonomous regions of Wallonia and Flanders. Which, I believe, is what the article in question is trying to identify as the causation of the recent security threats.
There are four autonomous regions in total. Brussels is its own region as well as Duitstalige Gemeenschap. Belgium is like the U.S with its federated states.
171
« on: November 21, 2015, 01:53:06 PM »
"Perched over Brussels stands the massive Palace of Justice, once a shining monument to democratic values, now cloaked for decades in scaffolding so decrepit it has come to symbolize Belgium's neglect for law and order. "
The Palace of Justice always has scaffolding up because it is constantly under construction. This is not because it symbolizes Belgium's neglect for law and order, but that it is the largest court in the world so once they complete one section they have to renovate another.
172
« on: November 21, 2015, 03:09:47 AM »
At least she lives somewhat close to you and not in a different country 
Yeah, so far, pretty good luck with this gal.
That's such a fucked up situation, m8
Believe me, it's the worst. Only getting to see each other every couple of months fucking blows.
That's why I'm so determined for my book to be successful, so I get that lovely dosh to see her more.
I know those feels. It took my honeydew and I three years to finally be together. The best of luck to you. 
173
« on: November 21, 2015, 02:49:29 AM »
Yes I do.
I only care because you care.
174
« on: November 21, 2015, 12:04:47 AM »
I sat for 8 AP exams, but only took 6 AP classes: 1 AP class my junior year but 3 exams and 5 AP courses my senior year.
175
« on: November 20, 2015, 05:19:26 AM »
"They were in car with a diplomatic license plate. They were masked. At the gate of the hotel, the guard stopped them and they started firing and we fled." The fuck
That is one of the accounts of how they entered. There is another version floating around as well that they forced their way through the barrier.
177
« on: November 18, 2015, 02:22:29 PM »
External factors play a role in everything- nobody disputes that much.
The question is which factors and what roles.
Exactly. No one is born a religious extremist. Family upbringing is probably a factor. The media and Internet allow for more exposure to varying degrees of individual religions.
179
« on: November 18, 2015, 01:45:57 PM »
Bone Thugs-n-Harmony made some exceptional 90s rap.
180
« on: November 16, 2015, 02:51:52 PM »
With your vulgar language, harassment, and shit trolling. literally you
Sometimes use vulgar language. You're correct.
Never harass anyone.
Never Troll.
So your point is moot.
You repeatedly sent me PM's insulting me when you didn't like something I posted, that's harassment, I'll post screenshots if "can't remember".
At least 60% of your opinions are trolling.
Yup. Post the screenies. I doubt I sent more than 3-4 messages. Which wouldn't be harassment.
60% of my opinions are trolling? You're fucking delusional. Which ones exactly?
If it happens once or twice it's harassment. Slap a girls ass at work once and it's sexual harassment.
And shit like you can't rape your wife, that tier of opinion.
Not if she enjoys it. Plus, from my records it looks like you were the one repeatedly messaging me.
But thats not a troll opinion, its 100% what I believe.
Not if she enjoys it? That doesn't even make sense...
If some chick from work thinks you look good and you slap her ass and she enjoys it, how is that sexual harassment?
Answer: its not.
I understand what you mean, but it is sexual harassment if it gets reported, regardless of who reports it. If you slapped your coworker's ass and she likes it, but the woman in the next cubicle reports it, it is still sexual harassment.
Pages: 1 ... 456 78 ... 11
|
Show Posts