Politics

[Maelstrom]

You mean like asking people not to use the phrase trigger word because their somone or other was shot and it traumatizes them kind of thing?

[Dude]

ninja'd @maestro if you're gonna do something then please do something about this off-topic clutter .-.

you obviously didn't get the memo then

[FireArrow]

you obviously didn't get the memo then

Just as we have freedom of speech, so too do you have the freedom to choose what media to consume and not consume. It's not as if the contents of this are being broadcast on the main page of the NSM forums in bright bold letters for all to see. What would you rather this topic be about, if not politics?

(This thread is more about semantics at this point but the discussion was about politics. In a thread titled "Politics". I don't see the problem.)

[Dude]

New topic title: SUNSHINE AND RAINBOWS

i did this to make mlf happy that was the memo that waddle missed duh

god you're so insensitive

[FireArrow]

Most of the times I hear it is about people being stringently uptight about "offensive" things (in quotes for a reason).

That's usually the intended purpose when someone uses the word. Of course, their reason for calling someone out on being "too sensitive" is usually selfish and conceited. The word was literally invented as anti-left propaganda, so it has no place in intelligent discussion (same goes for any anti-right propaganda.)

[FireArrow]

i did this to make mlf happy that was the memo that waddle missed duh

god you're so insensitive

Yes, let's make MLF happy. Now that we know "Islams" are violent killing machines and Christians are perfectly pure and peaceful people, nothing else needs to be said.
if you didnt catch my alliteration i hate you

[BlackDragonSlayer]

That's usually the intended purpose when someone uses the word. Of course, their reason for calling someone out on being "too sensitive" is usually selfish and conceited. The word was literally invented as anti-left propaganda, so it has no place in intelligent discussion (same goes for any anti-right propaganda.)

[blueflower999]

:] for some reason people always tend to dislike it when I point out their mistakes

Because you tend to do it in a really technical way that makes it hard to rebut because I don't understand all the jargon. 

Whether something is factual or not isn't technically related to how an individual interprets it, meaning it's not in straight correlation to how an individual defines it!!

Sure, I don't have any problems with this.

also "wrong" can also be taken as "ethically wrong"

Is it ethically wrong to offend someone though? That's a whole nother debate and something that I've never really thought about hmm.

first of all https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
You assume "they" and "their" actions represent the entirety of the left view, but in reality it has no effect on the actual values.

Oh, I'm sorry. Excuse me. I need to learn not to stereotype the entire left into one viewpoint even though that's what everyone on the left does to the entire Republican party. I realize that not everyone shares the same views but I can assume a majority of people who identify themselves as "the left" share at least similar views on these sort of issues.

Second of all, in your example they weren't even denying people's right to be upset, as they were offended as well, but by the offended people.

This is... really confusing. Although I suppose it makes sense. There were still some pretty hateful things said on both sides that I could have done without.

If you don't mind opening your philosophy a bit for me fren, to me this only seems like a red herring

Certain issues, no matter how many times they're "proven," will never be seen as factual by the entirety of the American population. This of course is directed to both sides of the political spectrum.

everyone is entitled to their opinion, but you seem deadset that the left doesn't think like that. If the left has a right to its opinion, why shouldn't anyone else have the right?

Fair enough point. I suppose the problem is that I find a lot of people presenting the left's opinions as "progressive" (when in actuality "progressive" can be used to describe anything under the sun) or whatever. The left are the open-minded ones, the intellectuals, the educated, the scholarly. The right are the greedy stick-in-the-mud bigots who want to enslave everyone that isn't a millionaire into the economy!

Obviously that isn't the actual view of the Democratic party (at least I hope not) but it's certainly a dramatized view of many of its strong supporters.

If you're white and act racist towards fe. the asian people, you're clearly not gonna act that way towards other white people. That's known as discrimination and undermines the right to be treated as an equal individual of the society.

What if you're just a jerk and act that way towards everyone. Or would it be any worse if that person acted that way towards white people only? IDK you're ignoring my point that racist thought can't and shouldn't be regulated by the government, but only racist action.

also you're speaking from your own personal and individual perspective, and not representing the entirety of america. :x

Duh, what else do you expect me to do? The "entirety" of America doesn't agree on anything. Ever. Nothing in this thread represents the entirety of America.

You're absolutely right about when restricting "freedom", you restrict individualism. But that's exactly what laws and human rights do, and it's a dilemma to say should laws and human rights exist in a society. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation is a regulated thing for a reason, and^this explains pretty well why.

Sure, but that's why we have a set Bill of Rights to list what freedoms belong to humanity innately and to protect them from tyranny. But then the government starts to infringe on it. Then what do you do?

as long as you live in democracy you should be fine fren.

Vote Bernie Sanders 2016...?

[FireArrow]

*extremely low resolution image*

Bravo! Such a brilliant display of pretentiousness! I'll have to add this to my repertoire!

[BlackDragonSlayer]

Bravo! Such a brilliant display of pretentiousness! I'll have to add this to my repertoire!

Says you who said this:

Of course, their reason for calling someone out on being "too sensitive" is usually selfish and conceited.

[FireArrow]

Is it ethically wrong to offend someone though? That's a whole nother debate and something that I've never really thought about hmm.

I think this is the heart of it all.

Yes, it is ethically wrong to purposely offend someone.
Not, it's not ethically wrong to accidentally offend someone. If you do however, you should say sorry, not go "wow stop being so politically correct", which falls under the category of purposefully offending someone.

Off topic: I just realized purposely and purposefully are both words and they mean the same thing.

[FireArrow]

Says you who said this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
I'll stand by all three of these statements:
You're Pretentious
I'm Pretentious

Spoiler

Of course, their reason for calling someone out on being "too sensitive" is usually selfish and conceited.

[close]

[Dude]

Whoa, Firearrow, what the fuck

It's like you try to take everything I say seriously.

Calm down, brah.

EDIT: Nvm i misinterpreted what you said, continue.

[BlackDragonSlayer]

I think this is the heart of it all.

Yes, it is ethically wrong to purposely offend someone.
Not, it's not ethically wrong to accidentally offend someone. If you do however, you should say sorry, not go "wow stop being so politically correct", which falls under the category of purposefully offending someone.

Off topic: I just realized purposely and purposefully are both words and they mean the same thing.

This is where the issue gets complicated, though. Anybody (specifically referring to the earlier-mentioned "uptight" people) could be offended by anything. If you can thus define "offended" as applying to any situation, how can anybody disagree with you without purposefully offending you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
I'll stand by all three of these statements:
You're Pretentious
I'm Pretentious

Spoiler

Of course, their reason for calling someone out on being "too sensitive" is usually selfish and conceited.

[close]

The problem with what you said is that you're making a broad assumption that, with certainty, does not apply to the situation which I described in my earlier post, yet you are apparently assuming it does, and does so in every situation, or at least the majority of situations.

[Ruto]

When I hear someone say something like "the left ideology is flawed because..." I just think "this person is a moron and should be ignored." Because that's the level of intelligence and language you'd expect to see from someone who thinks The Blaze is good writing and delivers coherent arguments. Now in America, being on "the right side of politics" has the reputation of defending people who think it's okay to hate other people on something they can't control. Like Huckabee, who will sooner be a ball of lard than president.

I can't believe people get mad over being told they're being intolerant, then whine about being "persecuted." Do you expect people to support your behavior to support your baseless ideas and hurt feelings?