which would you eliminate from society. only pick 1

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Colossus-Big C
Which one would you vote to if you somehow had the chance.

Bardock42
Does banning murder also ban manslaughter, and killing in war, and other human on human killings? If so that would make it more interesting. If not, then I guess I'd eliminate rape.

Colossus-Big C
It bans manslaughter and other forms, but not war

-Pr-
Forgetting practicality for a moment, probably murderers, as I class them as being the worst of the bunch.

I get that you hate gays, but putting them on this list makes you look like a ****, tbh.

Bardock42
Hmm, probably still rape then.

Digi
Murderers, rapists, pedophiles, and homosexuals?! One of these things is not like the other... ermm

Firefly218
I'd get rid of murder

Digi
Murder's the obvious choice here. Not sure what the logical argument behind the others would be. Ending lives unfairly can't be given a price, even given how horrific rape and pedophilia can be.

And yeah, even including homosexuals makes you look like a bigot. Intentional or not, gotta watch how you're perceived.

Bardock42
Rape far, far, far exceeds the numbers of murder. Rape can lead to murder. Murder is dealt with in an appropriate way in most places and can be much more easily investigated.

Not having rape would have far more positive effects on the world.

ArtificialGlory
Homosexuals. Obviously.

Tzeentch
I'd pick rape, because rape targets women more and that's wrong.

Men are the target of murder more than women, so it's not really a huge deal imo.

Shakyamunison
Murders. You cannot recover from death.

Digi
Originally posted by Bardock42
Rape far, far, far exceeds the numbers of murder. Rape can lead to murder. Murder is dealt with in an appropriate way in most places and can be much more easily investigated.

Not having rape would have far more positive effects on the world.

Well, the "rape leads to murder" argument is somewhat invalidated within our thought experiment here. It couldn't lead to murder if you stopped all murder.

Otherwise, I don't know enough about the numbers to debate with you. It's just...I can't disagree with most of this, but killing a person - ending their life - just seems on a different level to me. Rape is horrific; no doubt. But like, would you stop 100 rapes or 10 unjust murders? Horrible choice, I know, but I'd have to stop the murders. Even if it's dealt with more fairly by the judicial system, those 10 innocent people are still dead.

There's not a wrong answer here. I don't want to seem too vehement. That's just my take.

-Pr-
Originally posted by Tzeentch
I'd pick rape, because rape targets women more and that's wrong.

Men are the target of murder more than women, so it's not really a huge deal imo.

I laughed. If I had a cookie to give you, you would have it.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Digi
Well, the "rape leads to murder" argument is somewhat invalidated within our thought experiment here. It couldn't lead to murder if you stopped all murder.

What I'm saying is that eliminating rape would also eliminate a portion of murders.

Originally posted by Digi

Otherwise, I don't know enough about the numbers to debate with you. It's just...I can't disagree with most of this, but killing a person - ending their life - just seems on a different level to me. Rape is horrific; no doubt. But like, would you stop 100 rapes or 10 unjust murders? Horrible choice, I know, but I'd have to stop the murders. Even if it's dealt with more fairly by the judicial system, those 10 innocent people are still dead.

There's not a wrong answer here. I don't want to seem too vehement. That's just my take.

It seems like a simplistic comparison though. Like I said, I am considering the ramifications within society. (take for example some places in Africa, where an estimated 1 in 3 woman will be raped in their life).

I agree with you that there's no simple answer, tbh, I mostly engaged you cause you said "Murder's the obvious choice here. Not sure what the logical argument behind the others would be." which I took as basically the opposite of what you said now :P

jaden101
Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, probably still rape them.

Fixed.

Nemesis X
I pick eliminating pedophilia. It's that kind of crap that can traumatize children to become killers, rapists, or both as they get older.

NemeBro
Originally posted by Bardock42
Rape far, far, far exceeds the numbers of murder. Uh, based on what?

The UN did a study apparently that shows there are 250,000 rapes recorded annually, with over 60 countries recorded.

In 2012, homicide statistics show an estimate of over 460,000 intentional murders a year, not even counting shit like Involuntary Manslaughter which, per Big C, is covered.

I'd choose murder, without a doubt.

Stealth Moose
Originally posted by -Pr-
Forgetting practicality for a moment, probably murderers, as I class them as being the worst of the bunch.

I get that you hate gays, but putting them on this list makes you look like a ****, tbh.

thumb up

He is from Russia though. That was probably a state requirement.

BackFire
Anyone who votes for rape will be banned. I don't want to be removed from society.

Stealth Moose
Since the rape ban is being blocked, a movement to tack on 'ban basements' to the "set aside money for war widows" bill is moving forward.

Bardock42
Originally posted by NemeBro
Uh, based on what?

The UN did a study apparently that shows there are 250,000 rapes recorded annually, with over 60 countries recorded.

In 2012, homicide statistics show an estimate of over 460,000 intentional murders a year, not even counting shit like Involuntary Manslaughter which, per Big C, is covered.

I'd choose murder, without a doubt.

So, you are comparing the actual number of murders around the world, to the number of reported rapes to police officials in 62 countries (less than 1/3rd of countries in the UN). And you somehow do that with a straight face?

Stealth Moose
Originally posted by Bardock42
So, you are comparing the actual number of murders around the world, to the number of reported rapes to police officials in 62 countries (less than 1/3rd of countries in the UN). And you somehow do that with a straight face?

Not to lend major weight to either side, but rape often goes unreported, especially in societies where it is a shame to be raped, or in the military, or family, male on male, etc. There's no accurate number, whereas most murders go reported, if not solved.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Not to lend major weight to either side, but rape often goes unreported, especially in societies where it is a shame to be raped, or in the military, or family, male on male, etc. There's no accurate number, whereas most murders go reported, if not solved.

Yeah, I know, and he knows that as well. Hence my disbelief.

-Pr-
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
thumb up

He is from Russia though. That was probably a state requirement.

It all makes sense now...

Digi
Originally posted by Bardock42
What I'm saying is that eliminating rape would also eliminate a portion of murders.

It seems like a simplistic comparison though. Like I said, I am considering the ramifications within society. (take for example some places in Africa, where an estimated 1 in 3 woman will be raped in their life).

I agree with you that there's no simple answer, tbh, I mostly engaged you cause you said "Murder's the obvious choice here. Not sure what the logical argument behind the others would be." which I took as basically the opposite of what you said now :P

Ah. Ok then. thumb up

NemeBro
Originally posted by Bardock42
So, you are comparing the actual number of murders around the world, to the number of reported rapes to police officials in 62 countries (less than 1/3rd of countries in the UN). And you somehow do that with a straight face?

So where are you getting that more rapes occur than murders? Much more the variety of deaths that fall under this thread's purview?

Shabazz916
Homosexuals... ppl have to die one way or another to balance out the human race but we dnt need the cancer that are Homosexuals

NemeBro
Originally posted by Shabazz916
Homosexuals... ppl have to die one way or another to balance out the human race but we dnt need the cancer that are Homosexuals But would you not say that homosexuals, with their tendency to not have children through intercourse, also balance out the human race?

Wouldn't you say that rape, by your logic, only adds unnecessary numbers to the human race and is, according to your rationale, meaningless?

Tzeentch
what

Stealth Moose
Originally posted by Shabazz916
Homosexuals... ppl have to die one way or another to balance out the human race but we dnt need the cancer that are Homosexuals

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iMm7O1Hw_aM/UF2MsnxFUZI/AAAAAAAADG4/5ObyR6zF3y8/s1600/george-takei.gif

ArtificialGlory
Originally posted by Shabazz916
Homosexuals... ppl have to die one way or another to balance out the human race but we dnt need the cancer that are Homosexuals

This is actually a great and a very well-thought out point. You know, if you're an idiot.

Symmetric Chaos
Jews

Firefly218
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Jews

hitler

Bardock42
Originally posted by NemeBro
So where are you getting that more rapes occur than murders? Much more the variety of deaths that fall under this thread's purview?

I take it from places where we can trust the statistics. For example the statistics you cite for rape, don't even include the Congo, which alone accounts for 40 000 instances of it per year. Taking the FBI Crime Statistics in the US, and disregarding the well known fact that murder is basically always reported while rape is (even in the US) notoriously underreported, we can see that in the year 2012, there were 14,173 murders and non-negligent manslaughters, while there were 78,174 instances of forcible rape (disregarding statutory rape, rape of men, and other sex offenses) that means the underreported crime of rape is more than 5.5 times as commonly reported as murder. http://goo.gl/WD8Yk3

Negligent Manslaughter (your big boogie man) happened under 200 times (197 to be precise) ( http://goo.gl/qedhzd ) . Basically negligible compared to the other two.

Coming, once more, back to the rape statistic you cite countries like Turkey, Mozambique or Syria allege that they have a rate of up to 100 times lower than the US, we know this can not possibly be true (or perhaps you believe the US is just way, way more rape-y).

Dude, why are we arguing this, you don't believe yourself that murders happen at a higher rate than rapes, what do you gain from pretending it does?

BackFire
Originally posted by Shabazz916
Homosexuals... ppl have to die one way or another to balance out the human race but we dnt need the cancer that are Homosexuals

This post made me think of another possibility. Can we somehow remove morons from society?

Stealth Moose
Originally posted by BackFire
This post made me think of another possibility. Can we somehow remove morons from society?

I'd say hand out plasmids. That seems to thin the herd a little bit in theory.

NemeBro
Originally posted by Bardock42
I take it from places where we can trust the statistics. For example the statistics you cite for rape, don't even include the Congo, which alone accounts for 40 000 instances of it per year. Taking the FBI Crime Statistics in the US, and disregarding the well known fact that murder is basically always reported while rape is (even in the US) notoriously underreported, we can see that in the year 2012, there were 14,173 murders and non-negligent manslaughters, while there were 78,174 instances of forcible rape (disregarding statutory rape, rape of men, and other sex offenses) that means the underreported crime of rape is more than 5.5 times as commonly reported as murder. http://goo.gl/WD8Yk3

Negligent Manslaughter (your big boogie man) happened under 200 times (197 to be precise) ( http://goo.gl/qedhzd ) . Basically negligible compared to the other two.

Coming, once more, back to the rape statistic you cite countries like Turkey, Mozambique or Syria allege that they have a rate of up to 100 times lower than the US, we know this can not possibly be true (or perhaps you believe the US is just way, way more rape-y).

Dude, why are we arguing this, you don't believe yourself that murders happen at a higher rate than rapes, what do you gain from pretending it does?

Based on what do you come to the conclusion that Turkey, Mozambique, and Syria can not possibly have much less rape than the United States? I have no doubt that there are more rapes than what are cited that go unreported, but as you've already said, the same is true of the United States.

I never said murder definitely occurred at a higher rate than rape though, I merely wanted to see your own sources (Which you've actually started to provide, and I thank you for that), and provided the only statistics I could personally find after a single lazy search (I'm not doing your work for you). Frankly, I have no idea why you are whining and acting self-righteous just because someone wanted to see the source supporting the claim you made, lol.

Bardock, what tangible gain would I get from pretending murder happens more than rape?

Not that which occurs more changes my answer. I view murder as considerably worse than rape.

Bardock42
Well, maybe don't parrot unrelated statistics next time, then we won't have to argue about them. I mean, tbh you could have just read the next couple sentences on the wikipedia article you found. At any rate, I showed to you that rape actually occurs considerably more. I have no problem with people choosing murder in this scenario. I just stated why I would choose rape. No right or wrong answer, really.

NemeBro
Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, maybe don't parrot unrelated statistics next time, then we won't have to argue about them. I mean, tbh you could have just read the next sentence on the wikipedia article you found. At any rate, I showed to you that rape actually occurs considerably more, like I claimed, so maybe we won't have to argue about it next time it comes up. You've showed it happens more in the US, I think you mean.

Bardock42
Alright, putting your fingers in your ears and yelling "lalala" won't change reality. I wonder though, what do you believe, do you think rape happens more worldwide or murder? Just gut feeling if you don't feel you have enough evidence for something more decisive.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Bardock42
Alright, putting your fingers in your ears and yelling "lalala" won't change reality. I wonder though, what do you believe, do you think rape happens more worldwide or murder? Just gut feeling if you don't feel you have enough evidence for something more decisive.

Rapist would have been my second choice.

Robtard
Originally posted by BackFire
This post made me think of another possibility. Can we somehow remove morons from society?

Based on this thread alone I'd probably pick that one too, if it's an option.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Rapist would have been my second choice.

Yeah, I think both murderers and rapists are perfectly valid choices.



I guess I can see pedophiles (though they are sort of a subset of rapists if they act on their urges or possibly harmless if they don't). Homosexuals is just ridiculous. I hope even the most fundamentalists of certain religions wouldn't actually choose it (hoping that the people who have chosen it in this thread are just being crass)

NemeBro
Originally posted by Bardock42
Alright, putting your fingers in your ears and yelling "lalala" won't change reality.

You need to calm down, lol.

Oh I have little doubt rape probably occurs more often worldwide than murder. I just wanted you to provide your own sources on the matter.

Is that too much to ask?

Bardock42
I think I've provided enough to give a very clear picture. If you are further interested you can do your own research. One point though, again from the wiki that you found, the estimated rapes for South Africa alone are 500 000 (more than all the murders you cited).

Robtard
There's going to be a lot of bored Africans.

Astner
Originally posted by Bardock42
Rape far, far, far exceeds the numbers of murder.
Considering how there are women who claim to be rape victims because they agreed to have sex with their boyfriends even though they really didn't want to, or because they were drunk and had sex with someone they normally wouldn't have sex with; it doesn't surprise me.

Bardock42
Well, those are negligible really, especially considering the likely immensely high dark figure.

Of course rapes need to be investigated and if what you say happens it is terrible, but all things really point to people being raped being a mind bogglingly far greater number than people claiming to be raped. (especially cause coming forward about being raped is quite shit)

Cinemaholic
Originally posted by Nemesis X
I pick eliminating pedophilia. It's that kind of crap that can traumatize children to become killers, rapists, or both as they get older. This.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, those are negligible really, especially considering the likely immensely high dark figure.


From hospitals...women come in for rape kits and only 1 out of 100 (random number) show signs of rape and most of the other 99 (again, random number) withdraw their accusation...


So how much of those rapes are being included in that dark figure (or excluded)?



I chose homosexuals, by the way. smile

Epicurus
I vote the 5th option aka Colossus-Big C.

Bardock42
Originally posted by dadudemon
From hospitals...women come in for rape kits and only 1 out of 100 (random number) show signs of rape and most of the other 99 (again, random number) withdraw their accusation...


So how much of those rapes are being included in that dark figure (or excluded)?



I chose homosexuals, by the way. smile

I believe most dark figure numbers are arrived at through surveys.

The issues with rape kit seem more often how they are administered and how invasive they are, that they do not actually get tested in a lot of cases (huge backlogs, often less than 20% actually evaluated). Wikipedia states that on average 60% of them show foreign material (I don't think rape kits can actually "show" that a rape happened, they are just one sort of evidence).

I couldn't find figures of how many rape charges are dropped at the urging of the alleged victim. If you have a number for that I'd be very interested.

Shakyamunison
I think we should get rid of the people who make spam, malware or viruses.

Astner
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Murders. You cannot recover from death.
thumb up

dadudemon
Originally posted by Epicurus
I vote the 5th option aka Colossus-Big C.

That was sort of my original post.

I said to eliminate the gays which would get rid of threads like these...


Since I'm not a mod, that might have gotten me in trouble.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Bardock42
I believe most dark figure numbers are arrived at through surveys.

The issues with rape kit seem more often how they are administered and how invasive they are, that they do not actually get tested in a lot of cases (huge backlogs, often less than 20% actually evaluated). Wikipedia states that on average 60% of them show foreign material (I don't think rape kits can actually "show" that a rape happened, they are just one sort of evidence).

I couldn't find figures of how many rape charges are dropped at the urging of the alleged victim. If you have a number for that I'd be very interested.

I wish I had some figures.


The fake numbers I used come from my wife's best friend (she is an nurse, used to do hospital work, and administered the rape kits). She believes rape is extremely rare and has become jaded. Not to get graphic (not sure how much they enforce the PG-13 guidelines, anymore) by the do "dip stick" them with swabs, take pictures of their vaginal opening, anus, breasts, buttocks, labia minora, face, and some other stuff that I am forgetting. They also write stuff down that would piss people off if they knew: a subjective opinion about tearing in places (it is subjective because they mark the degree of tear and sometimes include commentary...it's for court stuff). My wife's friend said that, over the years, she had administered a rape kit to well over a thousand women and of those, only 1 showed definitive signs of rape and the second showed questionable signs of rape (with the first going to trial).

But, as you would point out, not all rape is violent. I think my wife's friend became jaded about rape because some of the women (she said "many"wink outright state that they weren't raped in some form. So she spiraled into a jaded idea about rape regarding women and developed a strong confirmation bias. I'd like to know how she knew they withdrew the accusations, though. How would a nurse find that out (other than the person saying "never mind, I wasn't raped"wink.



The problem with many rape cases is there is no evidence of violent rape. So, just finding evidence of a man's semen in a vagina is not enough for a conviction (nor should it be). It becomes a "he said she said" scenario unless other things can become involved. The man could have raped her, though, and he goes free. This is why a think every man should have his female partner sign a release form before having sex with them. big grin

Bardock42
I agree with it being tough to prosecute rape (although it is also not always prosecuted to the full extend, police officers or nurses that distrust victims not doing their jobs seems to be an actual issue), that's why I think a lot of secondary influences need to be worked on. Things like how society views women and their bodies, teaching men about what constitutes rape and about possessiveness, and how to actually help women in dangerous situations, vastly raising awareness about domestic rape and giving victims the ability and feeling that they can speak out without being stigmatised or attacked (oftentimes victims find the treatment they receive as violating as the rape, that is not the case for any other crime). Not making rape the butt of the every joke (making rapists feel justified, and victims ostracised, or triggering flashbacks in them).

At any rate, these problems that you raised are another reason why I'd choose to eliminate rape. It's a much more complicated problem. And the solutions are complicated as well. Murder is clear cut, and we have systems to prevent and punish it that work much, much better.

NemeBro
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I think we should get rid of the people who make spam, malware or viruses. This affects me far more personally than any other subject, I agree. thumb up

Bardock42
Originally posted by NemeBro
This affects me far more personally than any other subject, I agree. thumb up

Get Gmail and a Mac...you're welcome.

NemeBro
That's like cutting off your dick so that you won't catch an STD.

It defeats the purpose.

Stealth Moose
I hear Mac virus protection is like putting a plastic bag over your monitor.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I hear Mac virus protection is like putting a plastic bag over your monitor.

Annoying and not really needed?

BackFire
That's just Apple products in general you're describing.

iscaremonkeys
rapist. if I had two choices Id pick rapist and pedobears

Stealth Moose
Originally posted by Bardock42
Annoying and not really needed?

No, it's just to prevent users from doing anything that jeopardizes their security.

Nephthys
Originally posted by Astner
Considering how there are women who claim to be rape victims because they agreed to have sex with their boyfriends even though they really didn't want to, or because they were drunk and had sex with someone they normally wouldn't have sex with; it doesn't surprise me.

What a completely scummy thing to say.

NemeBro
Well to be fair it has been shown that not all women who claim to be raped were, in fact, raped.

Astner is just being an edgemaster though, yeah.

dadudemon
What if men started claiming they were raped every time they got drunk and had sex with a woman? The alcohol clearly impairs men's judgement and they were probably coerced/enticed into sex in multiple ways (flirting, sexy atire, etc.). Men are more visually stimulated than women. So that's rape. shifty

Stealth Moose
I'm pretty sure I could get a few advertisers for eye-rape then, under that premise.

Nephthys
Originally posted by NemeBro
Well to be fair it has been shown that not all women who claim to be raped were, in fact, raped.

Astner is just being an edgemaster though, yeah.

Of course.

Its just that feeling the need to say that in the way he did makes him a dick.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
No, it's just to prevent users from doing anything that jeopardizes their security.

Again, Unix system, more powerful than Windows users can even comprehend....

Originally posted by Nephthys
Of course.

Its just that feeling the need to say that in the way he did makes him a dick.

He has a well known track record of providing evidence of his assholity....

Epicurus
Originally posted by Nephthys
Its just that feeling the need to say that in the way he did makes him a dick.
That's Asstner in a nutshell.

Stealth Moose
Originally posted by Bardock42
Again, Unix system, more powerful than Windows users can even comprehend....

http://ali360.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/macs-and-pcs.jpg

dadudemon
Originally posted by Bardock42
Again, Unix system, more powerful than Windows users can even comprehend....


Please correct me if I am wrong, but aren't the Windows OSs Unix-like Operating Systems?

Edit - Just checked. While there are similarities, it is not considered "Unix-like." OSX, however, is. big grin

Omega Vision
There needs to be an option in the poll for homophobic bigots.

Astner
Originally posted by Omega Vision
There needs to be an option in the poll for homophobic bigots.
The body will stop producing antibodies once the disease is cured. Likewise if you got rid of the homosexuals you'd get rid of the homophobes.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Omega Vision
There needs to be an option in the poll for homophobic bigots.

They will always exist. They are seen as much different from the "norm" so, even if you got rid of every single bigot, now, they would show up in droves in just a single generation.

Same thing with homosexuals: get rid of them all, now, and they would show up by the millions in just a single generation.



Since I hold the opinion the homosexuality is not just genetics, even if everyone got a "genetic cure" for homosexuality, I still think homosexuality would still exist.


We are stuck with homos and homo bigots pretty much forever. big grin

Stealth Moose
Originally posted by Astner
The body will stop producing antibodies once the disease is cured. Likewise if you got rid of the homosexuals you'd get rid of the homophobes.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/theoatmeal-img/comics/gay_marriage/gay_marriage.png

Astner
I'm not homophobic, I just like to mess around with people.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Since I hold the opinion the homosexuality is not just genetics,
You're welcome.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Astner
You're welcome.

If you stalked me on KMC, you'd know that I already knew this and discussed it several years ago in the GDF when the forum was more active. smile


That's environment, not genetics.


I hold that homosexuality is a combination of genetics, environment, and choice with none being the ultimate decider.


Edit - Also, thousands and maybe millions of homosexual men that are only children beg to differ with the title of that link. wink For me, that tells me that choice and genetics also play a role: not just environment.

Astner
Originally posted by dadudemon
If you stalked me on KMC, you'd know that I already knew this and discussed it several years ago in the GDF when the forum was more active. smile

That's environment, not genetics.

I hold that homosexuality is a combination of genetics, environment, and choice with none being the ultimate decider.
But there's no evidence of a gay-gene.

Bardock42
Originally posted by dadudemon
Please correct me if I am wrong, but aren't the Windows OSs Unix-like Operating Systems?

Edit - Just checked. While there are similarities, it is not considered "Unix-like." OSX, however, is. big grin

DOS was a cheap rip off of Unix. Current Windows systems are based on NT and are not really related to Unix. They are not POSIX compliant anymore.

Originally posted by Astner
You're welcome.

Ah pop-sci article based on one study. Well that convinces me...

Astner
Originally posted by Bardock42
Ah pop-sci article based on one study. Well that convinces me...
Well, you're free to do your own research and present whatever counterarguments you come across.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Astner
Well, you're free to do your own research and present whatever counterarguments you come across.

Yeah, I'm free to do that, I'm also free to find the io9 article posted a week after yours backpeddling its claims. You're welcome

dadudemon
Originally posted by Astner
But there's no evidence of a gay-gene.

What the **** is this?


Astner, I am not your enemy on most of your social positions. I just don't think your positions are as strong as you make them. For instance, I don't go around saying that people are born gay: that's preposterous and creepy. But, at the same time, I think our behaviors, even our sexual behaviors, are influenced by our genetics.

Colossus-Big C
If homosexuals are free to be gay than homophobes are free to be homophobes. Its only fair.

Why judge someone because they naturally dislike something?

Stealth Moose
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, I'm free to do that, I'm also free to find the io9 article posted a week after yours backpeddling its claims. You're welcome

thumb up

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
If homosexuals are free to be gay than homophobes are free to be homophobes. Its only fair.

Why judge someone because they naturally dislike something?

Because when your dislike turns into impersonal hatred, it makes you a miserable douchebag.

I dislike snakes and reptiles (they are rather boring). I don't arbitrarily block their rights or launch smear/hate campaigns against them and their advocates just because I don't like them.

No one says you have to 'like' everyone and anyone; they're simply saying that people have equal rights in society and respect that.

Firefly218
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
If homosexuals are free to be gay than homophobes are free to be homophobes. Its only fair.

Why judge someone because they naturally dislike something?

Because they are exerting their dislikes on others. I'm sure homosexuals don't care too much about the existence of homophobes, they start caring when homophobes pass laws taking away their rights.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
Why judge someone because they naturally dislike something?

1. Why judge someone because they naturally like someone?

2. If you're a Christian, you're not supposed to be judging anyone. You're supposed to lovingly accept anyone. That doesn't mean you lovingly accept a Pedo to watch your children, it means you help mow his lawn if he breaks his foot or you minister to him if he is in need of spiritual strengthening.

3. Why fill yourself full of hate towards people are you probably never going to change? A futile effort, to say the least.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I dislike snakes and reptiles (they are rather boring). I don't arbitrarily block their rights or launch smear/hate campaigns against them and their advocates just because I don't like them.


Soooo...

You're saying that the gays are the reptile aliens that rule the world?

Colossus-Big C
"Hating someone" is judging ?

Colossus-Big C
Also I get your points

dadudemon
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
"Hating someone" is judging ?

Yes. You've judged them as worthy of your hate because of their actions.


The judging part is because you've decided to think or feel something negative because of a person's actions: something a Christian is not supposed to do.


I should be clear that the judgement I am referring to is one of a negative hateful judgement. It is not the same kind of judgement you use to tell how far to throw a piece of paper to make it into the trash can.

English just does not have the proper word for this version of judgement that we are using it.

Stealth Moose
Originally posted by dadudemon
Soooo...

You're saying that the gays are the reptile aliens that rule the world?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bP6k59dMHBI/UnQmzKaljjI/AAAAAAAAZUA/3ZDsMcXw4d0/s400/grumpy-cat-8141_preview_zps9177ab07.png

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
"Hating someone" is judging ?

http://img.pandawhale.com/62051-Grumpy-Cat-YES-vnq0.jpeg

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.