Stop the hate.
Options
Replies
-
It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
I think the issue that arises with the people against gay marriage is that there aren't any logical reasons to be against it. These are the kind of arguments I have heard:
1. There is simply no reason to change the way it has always been. = This argument is dead in the water because it is just an appeal to tradition. Saying we have always done it this way is not enough to justify telling people they can't marry who they love.
2. It is called an abomination in the bible. = Lets face it the overwhelming majority of people against gay marriage are against it's because of their religion. You have every right to be against it on those grounds in your personal life but you can't have a law based on your religion.
3. It will destroy the institution of marriage = This one is so bad it is embarrassing. It is basically like saying if gay people can get married my marriage will lose its meaning. I say if that is true then your marriage deserves to fall apart because that is just stupid.
4. It will lead to people wanting to marry their pets and trees. = I would not even list this one except for the fact that I have heard it multiple times. I think when people don't have a logical argument they just start grasping at straws.
It isn't the same as smoking. You could argue that smoking does actually have an effect on you. There are real health concerns with smoking. A gay marriage does not affect you at all. If a gay person was deployed to Japan or something like that then their significant other could go with them. They could have the right to visit their significant other when they are dying in the hospital. None of these changes would harm you at all.
Bottom line is if there aren't any logical reasons to be against it then we have to assume that it is nothing more than a personal preference. If you would simply prefer it is gay people were not allowed to marry the people that they love and that is your only reason for being against gay marriage then that would make you a bigot. I am open to the possibility that your opposition my be more than your personal preference but I am not yet convinced. What is your logical secular reason that gay marriage should be banned?0 -
It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
I think the issue that arises with the people against gay marriage is that there aren't any logical reasons to be against it. These are the kind of arguments I have heard:
1. There is simply no reason to change the way it has always been. = This argument is dead in the water because it is just an appeal to tradition. Saying we have always done it this way is not enough to justify telling people they can't marry who they love.
2. It is called an abomination in the bible. = Lets face it the overwhelming majority of people against gay marriage are against it because of their religion. You have every right to be against it on those grounds in your personal life but you can't have a law based on your religion.
3. It will destroy the institution of marriage = This one is so bad it is embarrassing. It is basically like saying if gay people can get married my marriage will lose its meaning. I say if that is true then your marriage deserves to fall apart because that is just stupid.
4. It will lead to people wanting to marry their pets and trees. = I would not even list this one except for the fact that I have heard it multiple times. I think when people don't have a logical argument they just start grasping at straws.
It isn't the same as smoking. You could argue that smoking does actually have an effect on you. There are real health concerns with smoking. A gay marriage does not affect you at all. If a gay person was deployed to Japan or something like that then their significant other could go with them. They could have the right to visit their significant other when they are dying in the hospital. None of these changes would harm you at all.
Bottom line is if there aren't any logical reasons to be against it then we have to assume that it is nothing more than a personal preference. If you would simply prefer it is gay people were not allowed to marry the people that they love and that is your only reason for being against gay marriage then that would make you a bigot. I am open to the possibility that your opposition my be more than your personal preference but I am not yet convinced. What is your logical secular reason that gay marriage should be banned?
Goods points - I believe #2 was overturned by the guy who said love one another and don't judge lest yea be judged, and for that was put to death0 -
I never said they couldn't. Strawman. Read and comprehend.
My intention, (as if I am obligated to explain) is to cover any and all possible variances of people getting together in anyway be it sexually, socially, racially or what ever. It is a blanket statement to cover any and all possible combinations of differences. You would think people here could be less ridiculous about the words they try to put in someones mouth.It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
The "intermixed relations?"
Hey, the 1950's called. They want their polite euphemisms for "we don't like the colored folks minglin' with us white folks" back.
I'd still like to know what the actual intention behind those particular words was..... I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but my eyebrow did ratchet upwards a few notches!
Still in the spirit of the thread I won't hate her even if her views are that appalling!
Surely consenting adults can chose to be together if they want? I don't see what everyone has to get their panties in a bunch about. Gay/Straight/Black/White/Rich/Poor, who cares? I suggest focusing on your own life, it'll make you a happier person in the long run......0 -
I never said they couldn't. Strawman. Read and comprehend.
Unfortunately the ability to comprehend is not a requirement to surf the internet. Some are just not going to get the point you were trying to make.0 -
Sadly you are right. I am sure it's one of those selective understanding issues.I never said they couldn't. Strawman. Read and comprehend.
Unfortunately the ability to comprehend is not a requirement to surf the internet. Some are just not going to get the point you were trying to make.0 -
i hate black licorice. it's evil.
Having read the rest of the thread I can only sumise that you might also be racist - how do you feel about black licorice marrying red licorice...?0 -
I used to love this thread but I hate it now.0
-
It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
I think the issue that arises with the people against gay marriage is that there aren't any logical reasons to be against it. These are the kind of arguments I have heard:
1. There is simply no reason to change the way it has always been. = This argument is dead in the water because it is just an appeal to tradition. Saying we have always done it this way is not enough to justify telling people they can't marry who they love.
2. It is called an abomination in the bible. = Lets face it the overwhelming majority of people against gay marriage are against it because of their religion. You have every right to be against it on those grounds in your personal life but you can't have a law based on your religion.
3. It will destroy the institution of marriage = This one is so bad it is embarrassing. It is basically like saying if gay people can get married my marriage will lose its meaning. I say if that is true then your marriage deserves to fall apart because that is just stupid.
4. It will lead to people wanting to marry their pets and trees. = I would not even list this one except for the fact that I have heard it multiple times. I think when people don't have a logical argument they just start grasping at straws.
It isn't the same as smoking. You could argue that smoking does actually have an effect on you. There are real health concerns with smoking. A gay marriage does not affect you at all. If a gay person was deployed to Japan or something like that then their significant other could go with them. They could have the right to visit their significant other when they are dying in the hospital. None of these changes would harm you at all.
Bottom line is if there aren't any logical reasons to be against it then we have to assume that it is nothing more than a personal preference. If you would simply prefer it is gay people were not allowed to marry the people that they love and that is your only reason for being against gay marriage then that would make you a bigot. I am open to the possibility that your opposition my be more than your personal preference but I am not yet convinced. What is your logical secular reason that gay marriage should be banned?
Goods points - I believe #2 was overturned by the guy who said love one another and don't judge lest yea be judged, and for that was put to death
That is certainly an acceptable interpretation. As an atheist myself I don't actually get too involved in trying to interpret the bible for its believers mainly because I just don't see it as any sort of authority especially when it comes the creation of laws.0 -
My intention, (as if I am obligated to explain) is to cover any and all possible variances of people getting together in anyway be it sexually, socially, racially or what ever. It is a blanket statement to cover any and all possible combinations of differences. You would think people here could be less ridiculous about the words they try to put in someones mouth.It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
The "intermixed relations?"
Hey, the 1950's called. They want their polite euphemisms for "we don't like the colored folks minglin' with us white folks" back.
I'd still like to know what the actual intention behind those particular words was..... I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but my eyebrow did ratchet upwards a few notches!
Still in the spirit of the thread I won't hate her even if her views are that appalling!
You are certainly not obligated in any legal sense of the word to explain anything you say. You aren't even obligated to make sense. You can just string together a bunch of random words if you choose to. The thing is if you want to be taken seriously however you are obligated to make sense.
This means that you do have to explain yourself. The merit of your arguments will be judged based on your ability to explain and support your points. This should not be a surprise to you which makes your parenthetic statement rather pointless if you do in fact already understand what I am telling you here.
If you are just a troll and you don't care to do any of that you could just do whatever you want and you will eventually fall to obscurity like you should. It at least appears that you do have a desire to be more than just a noise maker so you have provided an explanation. I feel your explanation is acceptable given the spirit of what you were trying to say.
I think it was completely justified to ask for the clarification as the words at face value did appear to have some bigotry in them. Do feel that I have already posted a refutation of your argument regarding gay marriage so I won't go it to that here.0 -
My intention, (as if I am obligated to explain) is to cover any and all possible variances of people getting together in anyway be it sexually, socially, racially or what ever. It is a blanket statement to cover any and all possible combinations of differences. You would think people here could be less ridiculous about the words they try to put in someones mouth.It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
The "intermixed relations?"
Hey, the 1950's called. They want their polite euphemisms for "we don't like the colored folks minglin' with us white folks" back.
I'd still like to know what the actual intention behind those particular words was..... I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but my eyebrow did ratchet upwards a few notches!
Still in the spirit of the thread I won't hate her even if her views are that appalling!
I didn't try to put any words into your mouth! In fact, I reserved judgement on the meaning behind your words until you could expand upon them a bit.....
But your explanation seems to suggest that it is perfectly fine for someone to hate my mixed-race relationship? As long as they don't hate me? That, of course, is total b*llocks.......0 -
My intention, (as if I am obligated to explain) is to cover any and all possible variances of people getting together in anyway be it sexually, socially, racially or what ever. It is a blanket statement to cover any and all possible combinations of differences. You would think people here could be less ridiculous about the words they try to put in someones mouth.It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
The "intermixed relations?"
Hey, the 1950's called. They want their polite euphemisms for "we don't like the colored folks minglin' with us white folks" back.
I'd still like to know what the actual intention behind those particular words was..... I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but my eyebrow did ratchet upwards a few notches!
Still in the spirit of the thread I won't hate her even if her views are that appalling!
I didn't try to put any words into your mouth! In fact, I reserved judgement on the meaning behind your words until you could expand upon them a bit.....
But your explanation seems to suggest that it is perfectly fine for someone to hate my mixed-race relationship? As long as they don't hate me? That, of course, is total b*llocks.......
Well the way I read her comment is that she is stating that someone disagreeing with a type of relationship doesn't mean they hate the people in the relationship.
But not uncommon on here (or anywhere for that matter) to be overly sensitive when they believe someone is trashing something about their life.0 -
My intention, (as if I am obligated to explain) is to cover any and all possible variances of people getting together in anyway be it sexually, socially, racially or what ever. It is a blanket statement to cover any and all possible combinations of differences. You would think people here could be less ridiculous about the words they try to put in someones mouth.It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
The "intermixed relations?"
Hey, the 1950's called. They want their polite euphemisms for "we don't like the colored folks minglin' with us white folks" back.
I'd still like to know what the actual intention behind those particular words was..... I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but my eyebrow did ratchet upwards a few notches!
Still in the spirit of the thread I won't hate her even if her views are that appalling!
I didn't try to put any words into your mouth! In fact, I reserved judgement on the meaning behind your words until you could expand upon them a bit.....
But your explanation seems to suggest that it is perfectly fine for someone to hate my mixed-race relationship? As long as they don't hate me? That, of course, is total b*llocks.......
I thought she was trying to say that she can be against a persons decisions without being an actual bigot and she used a very general term to simply included any disapproval rather than a specific case.
I agree that you did reserve your judgement and you gave her a chance to clarify. You did not at any point put words in her mouth.
I think being against a mixed race relationship would be a great example of what I was talking about with the gay marriage thing. If you want to claim you are not a bigot then you would have to explain with a logical secular argument as to why you are against it.
If you response is something like "I don't have to explain anything it's just my opinion." that is fine except that means your disapproval would simply be a personal preference and in the absence of a logical argument to support it. You would be the very definition of a bigot at that point. I hope that explains why people are assuming a hatred exists when you oppose something without a logical justification.0 -
My intention, (as if I am obligated to explain) is to cover any and all possible variances of people getting together in anyway be it sexually, socially, racially or what ever. It is a blanket statement to cover any and all possible combinations of differences. You would think people here could be less ridiculous about the words they try to put in someones mouth.It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
The "intermixed relations?"
Hey, the 1950's called. They want their polite euphemisms for "we don't like the colored folks minglin' with us white folks" back.
I'd still like to know what the actual intention behind those particular words was..... I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but my eyebrow did ratchet upwards a few notches!
Still in the spirit of the thread I won't hate her even if her views are that appalling!
I didn't try to put any words into your mouth! In fact, I reserved judgement on the meaning behind your words until you could expand upon them a bit.....
But your explanation seems to suggest that it is perfectly fine for someone to hate my mixed-race relationship? As long as they don't hate me? That, of course, is total b*llocks.......
I thought she was trying to say that she can be against a persons decisions without being an actual bigot and she used a very general term to simply included any disapproval rather than a specific case.
I agree that you did reserve your judgement and you gave her a chance to clarify. You did not at any point put words in her mouth.
I think being against a mixed race relationship would be a great example of what I was talking about with the gay marriage thing. If you want to claim you are not a bigot then you would have to explain with a logical secular argument as to why you are against it.
If you response is something like "I don't have to explain anything it's just my opinion." that is fine except that means your disapproval would simply be a personal preference and in the absence of a logical argument to support it. You would be the very definition of a bigot at that point. I hope that explains why people are assuming a hatred exists when you oppose something without a logical justification.
I like the cut of your jib! Reasonable and well thought out posts on MFP? Whatever next.....?0 -
My intention, (as if I am obligated to explain) is to cover any and all possible variances of people getting together in anyway be it sexually, socially, racially or what ever. It is a blanket statement to cover any and all possible combinations of differences. You would think people here could be less ridiculous about the words they try to put in someones mouth.It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
The "intermixed relations?"
Hey, the 1950's called. They want their polite euphemisms for "we don't like the colored folks minglin' with us white folks" back.
I'd still like to know what the actual intention behind those particular words was..... I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but my eyebrow did ratchet upwards a few notches!
Still in the spirit of the thread I won't hate her even if her views are that appalling!
I didn't try to put any words into your mouth! In fact, I reserved judgement on the meaning behind your words until you could expand upon them a bit.....
But your explanation seems to suggest that it is perfectly fine for someone to hate my mixed-race relationship? As long as they don't hate me? That, of course, is total b*llocks.......
I thought she was trying to say that she can be against a persons decisions without being an actual bigot and she used a very general term to simply included any disapproval rather than a specific case.
I agree that you did reserve your judgement and you gave her a chance to clarify. You did not at any point put words in her mouth.
I think being against a mixed race relationship would be a great example of what I was talking about with the gay marriage thing. If you want to claim you are not a bigot then you would have to explain with a logical secular argument as to why you are against it.
If you response is something like "I don't have to explain anything it's just my opinion." that is fine except that means your disapproval would simply be a personal preference and in the absence of a logical argument to support it. You would be the very definition of a bigot at that point. I hope that explains why people are assuming a hatred exists when you oppose something without a logical justification.
I like the cut of your jib! Reasonable and well thought out posts on MFP? Whatever next.....?
Yeah I'm trying to make it a thing.0 -
My intention, (as if I am obligated to explain) is to cover any and all possible variances of people getting together in anyway be it sexually, socially, racially or what ever. It is a blanket statement to cover any and all possible combinations of differences. You would think people here could be less ridiculous about the words they try to put in someones mouth.It's not the intermixed relations that bother me, but the whole "full of hate" bandwagon. (not saying that is YOU, just saying it's widespread) If someone says they don't agree with gay marriage for example, they are accused of being "full of hate! :sad: )
I don't think disagreeing with certain unions or lifestyles means anyone is full of hate. That's like saying a non-smoker who doesn't want to be around smoke, hates smokers. I don't hate smokers, I just don't like their smoke. I think it is possible to have respect for others choices even if you don't agree with them. I also think the people accusing others of being "full of hate" should understand that they also should have some respect for others. There is such a victim mentality these days. That being said, I am sure they will be along to shut this thread down soon enough, as there will be someone who gets a bee in their bonnet.
The "intermixed relations?"
Hey, the 1950's called. They want their polite euphemisms for "we don't like the colored folks minglin' with us white folks" back.
I'd still like to know what the actual intention behind those particular words was..... I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but my eyebrow did ratchet upwards a few notches!
Still in the spirit of the thread I won't hate her even if her views are that appalling!
I didn't try to put any words into your mouth! In fact, I reserved judgement on the meaning behind your words until you could expand upon them a bit.....
But your explanation seems to suggest that it is perfectly fine for someone to hate my mixed-race relationship? As long as they don't hate me? That, of course, is total b*llocks.......
I thought she was trying to say that she can be against a persons decisions without being an actual bigot and she used a very general term to simply included any disapproval rather than a specific case.
I agree that you did reserve your judgement and you gave her a chance to clarify. You did not at any point put words in her mouth.
I think being against a mixed race relationship would be a great example of what I was talking about with the gay marriage thing. If you want to claim you are not a bigot then you would have to explain with a logical secular argument as to why you are against it.
If you response is something like "I don't have to explain anything it's just my opinion." that is fine except that means your disapproval would simply be a personal preference and in the absence of a logical argument to support it. You would be the very definition of a bigot at that point. I hope that explains why people are assuming a hatred exists when you oppose something without a logical justification.
What people "hate" is that it's no longer a matter of logic or personal choice. The pressure is to participate, and if you do not participate you are branded. e.g. a mayor of a major city here didn't go to a gay pride parade and because of that he was branded homophobic. He had to explain that on that day he wanted to be with his family on vacation and yet he is still judged. The whole phobic thing has totally gotten out of being anything logical.0 -
0 -
What people "hate" is that it's no longer a matter of logic or personal choice. The pressure is to participate, and if you do not participate you are branded. e.g. a mayor of a major city here didn't go to a gay pride parade and because of that he was branded homophobic. He had to explain that on that day he wanted to be with his family on vacation and yet he is still judged. The whole phobic thing has totally gotten out of being anything logical.
I won't say that people are not wrongfully accused of being homophobic. I am sure it does happen and without doing any fact checking that scenario with the mayor would be a good example of it. That does not really address my point which is that a person who takes a position which curtails the writes of another human in the absence of a logical justification is treading upon the grounds of bigotry.
I do not think that the label homophobia should applied to just anyone. In fact even though I have never heard a single logical argument that is sufficient to justify the ban. I will give every single person that is against it a fair chance to present their case. It could simply be that I have not heard the logical argument yet. I will say that the vast majority of people who have been against gay marriage seem to present the same arguments as people against interracial relationships. Their bible says its bad or their parents were against it or they just plain don't like gay people. When I have people telling me that directly I can't assume that it never happens.0 -
"i totally changed my position on that issue because of an argument i saw/participated in online," said no one ever. Our species has a huge need to be "right" about our opinions. How about we just stop with the giant blue boxes and try to make some real change towards our beliefs. It's called, "walking the walk," for the uninitiated.
That way, we could have a civilized conversation this morning over coffee. The OP was right. Way too much hate going on here and nobody is going to change anyone's position. Just a bunch of smart monkeys throwing verbal feces at each other.
Good try, Dude
Namaste0 -
What straw men have been employed against you? Do you even know what that means? When you try to use logical rhetoric without knowledge of what it means you look silly.0 -
Hate is typically the byproduct of jealousy and insecurity within ones self. Truth.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions