The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
How has it changed in the last.... 500 years? I bet you can show me any dress/pants/piece of clothing and I can tell you definitively what it is. So while the specific style for each gender has changed, the distinctions haven't.

perhaps im misunderstanding you? it seems to me as if youre referring to the distinction between clothes such as the difference between a for example t-shirt and a not t-shirt. if so im not sure why youre bringing that up because it has nothing to do with what im saying. im only referring to the distinction between what counts as "mens" clothing and what counts as "womens" clothing. that distinction is relative.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
perhaps im misunderstanding you? it seems to me as if youre referring to the distinction between clothes such as the difference between a for example t-shirt and a not t-shirt. if so im not sure why youre bringing that up because it has nothing to do with what im saying. im only referring to the distinction between what counts as "mens" clothing and what counts as "womens" clothing. that distinction is relative.

And I'm saying it isn't.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
perhaps im misunderstanding you? it seems to me as if youre referring to the distinction between clothes such as the difference between a for example t-shirt and a not t-shirt. if so im not sure why youre bringing that up because it has nothing to do with what im saying. im only referring to the distinction between what counts as "mens" clothing and what counts as "womens" clothing. that distinction is relative.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
And I'm saying it isn't.

and i still love you.

Ms. Marvel, if it is so relative, why are there seperate sections for men and women's clothing in every single store you enter?

because people have different tastes.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
and i still love you.

because people have different tastes.

No, because there is a clear distinction and if you violate that distinction, you're either a homo, confused, or an attention whore.

that makes perfect sense. im being sarcastic.

edit- for a minute there you and i were having a pretty good conversation, with you replying to my points properly and i doing the same, then you launched into a mini tangent about the difference between a t-shirt and not t-shirt (summerized), and then that. do all conversations with you end that way?

Nobody was talking about t-shirts, I have no idea what you're talking about.

was referring to this-

perhaps im misunderstanding you? it seems to me as if youre referring to the distinction between clothes such as the difference between a for example t-shirt and a not t-shirt. if so im not sure why youre bringing that up because it has nothing to do with what im saying. im only referring to the distinction between what counts as "mens" clothing and what counts as "womens" clothing. that distinction is relative.

basically, what i was saying there is that-

How has it changed in the last.... 500 years? I bet you can show me any dress/pants/piece of clothing and I can tell you definitively what it is. So while the specific style for each gender has changed, the distinctions haven't.

doesnt have anything to do with there being a relative distinction between female and non female clothing.

Swing and a miss. We're back to square one. There is a distinction between men's and women's clothing.

Originally posted by truejedi
And if you think this is an AMERICAN problem, you are out of your mind. Hello Eastern world where people face PRISON for this stuff. Hello China where they shut down GATHERINGS of people for being homo-sexual. Hello Africa where they EXECUTE homosexuals.

I really dislike having to educate ignorant people (you) on things they could easily look up themselves. Homosexuality was a common practice in China for a long time (barring dynastic concerns such as producing heirs.) It has only been in recent modern times that it became taboo. As for Africa? Hello religion! The two most popular religions in Africa are Christianity and Islam, the two most intolerant religions on the planet.

Originally posted by truejedi
America is as progressive as any country on earth when it comes to homosexuals. NOTHING in the article you linked should make you ashamed of your country, and it sickens me of you when I discover that is the tact you decide to take.

America is not as progressive as any country on Earth when it comes to homosexuals. Western Europe and the Nordic nations put us to shame. Of course they tend to beat us in everything else as well so its hardly surprising.

Originally posted by truejedi
I'm calling your BS right here. Discrimination against sexuality stems from the Bible? BS my friend. BS. So why does China have discrimination against it? That country totally rules from the bible, right? Why is it illegal to the point of death in Iran, Saudia Arabia, etc?

In fact, Achminjinidab stood up and said his country doesn't have gay people, because his people have less mental problems than ours.
BS, yes? But that DUDE is obviously NOT ruling by the Bible. Find something else to hate Christianity over, but blaming the Bible is you trying to pick a fight.

Idiot, the Koran was ripped off from Christianity, which was in turn ripped off from Judaism. They all share the same collection of delusional BS (with latter two adding on more garbage). Its not my job to explain to you the history of the three Abrahamic faiths. And again, China didn't develop discrimination against homosexuals until it was exported by Europe.

Originally posted by truejedi
Also, those against gay marriage do NOT base it on the Bible, but on a percieved (if imaginary) slight to their own marriage.

If you knew anything about sociology you would know that social norms are heavily influenced by religion. The person that believes that their marriage is under attack does so because homosexuality has received such a negative attitude in this nation and it effects every aspect of society. Its what a social norm is. Most people aren't even aware of their bigotry, they just accept it because its part of society.

Originally posted by truejedi
I read this from you before posting Autokrat. I come from the exact same background, and can say the exact same thing about myself. I don't know how old you are now, but considering you are posting here, it can't be too old. You mentioned you are in college, so at best, you were religious for... 2 adult years? The rest of your religious life, you would have to have been considered a child who never sought out the truth for yourself, i'm guessing. I chose my words carefully when i said fear of the unknown.

I'm willing to make the guess (and you may reject it out hand, because its easier) that you rejected religion BEFORE taking your classes to strengthen your arguments on why it was wrong. Even if so, rejecting something that is force-fed you in your formative years is hardly "knowing" something. I had lived in the same environment my entire life, but I hardly believe I know religion.

I neither fully embrace nor utterly deny religion at this point in my life, but I do know I refuse to pretend to have a full understanding of why people who do believe, beleive. I think anyone who acts like they know religion is either being dishonest to themselves, or simply arrogant. Especially in your TWENTIES man! Religious intolerance is ALSO discrimination, no matter HOW you look at it.

You know what I've been doing for the past two and a half months? Working with a Lutheran church (Missouri Synod) as part of a sociological research assignment where I had to observe a religious community and in turn write a thesis paper on the said community. Do not tell me that I don't understand religion, because you are wrong. People that keep their religion to themselves are acceptable, people that influence social norms and laws are not.

And if you wanted my age, its in my profile, I'm twenty.

Originally posted by truejedi
Stem cell research falls under abortion. Abortion, (which i have discussed at LENGTH) has NOTHING to do with religion. NOTHING. You try to make it religious, because it IS wrong to dictate legislation based on a faith based religion. For you to sit here though, and try to say opposition against abortion is christianity based makes me wonder [b]if you are lying about your upbringing. The Bible, my friend, does not say a single word against abortion. Not. One. Word. Abortion, in my opinion, is wrong, because it is MURDER. I'm sorry if you have a problem with the bible speaking against murder, but THAT is as close as you will get to a religious argument against abortion.

However, you try to make it religious, as well as anything else that you don't like, so that you can (rightfully) dismiss it out of hand. If the argument WAS rooted in the Bible, we wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Your problem is, you truly can't say abortion debate stems from christianity. Or, which religion were you raised in? [/B]

I have difficulty believing you came from a Christian upbringing but then doubt mine because I base opposition to abortion in the Bible. My entire religious life, I was told abortion was evil because God said it was.

While I accept there are some bizarre secular people that believe abortion is murder (because an unfeeling, unthinking fetus that can be disposed of without suffering is worth utilitarian consideration) the majority to opposition to abortion comes from religion. The fact that the Bible says nothing on the issue (and indeed we often see the Jews committing mass murder and genocide in the OT) is just an example of how incoherent religion is.

That being said, anyone who opposes stem cell research is opposing treatment that could potentially save millions of lives (assuming they have the healthcare of course), making them ignorant fvcktards that aren't worth the dirt I scrape off my shoes.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Swing and a miss. We're back to square one. There is a distinction between men's and women's clothing.

k.

Originally posted by Autokrat
I really dislike having to educate ignorant people (you) on things they could easily look up themselves. Homosexuality was a common practice in China for a long time (barring dynastic concerns such as producing heirs.) It has only been in recent modern times that it became taboo. As for Africa? Hello religion! The two most popular religions in Africa are Christianity and Islam, the two most intolerant religions on the planet.

As for religions being intolerant, it appears you've added an exaggerated connotation for the term.

America is not as progressive as any country on Earth when it comes to homosexuals. Western Europe and the Nordic nations put us to shame. Of course they tend to beat us in everything else as well so its hardly surprising.

Idiot, the Koran was ripped off from Christianity, which was in turn ripped off from Judaism. They all share the same collection of delusional BS (with latter two adding on more garbage). Its not my job to explain to you the history of the three Abrahamic faiths. And again, China didn't develop discrimination against homosexuals until it was exported by Europe.

If you knew anything about sociology you would know that social norms are heavily influenced by religion. The person that believes that their marriage is under attack does so because homosexuality has received such a negative attitude in this nation and it effects every aspect of society. Its what a social norm is. Most people aren't even aware of their bigotry, they just accept it because its part of society.

You know what I've been doing for the past two and a half months? Working with a Lutheran church (Missouri Synod) as part of a sociological research assignment where I had to observe a religious community and in turn write a thesis paper on the said community. Do not tell me that I don't understand religion, because you are wrong. People that keep their religion to themselves are acceptable, people that influence social norms and laws are not.

I have difficulty believing you came from a Christian upbringing but then doubt mine because I base opposition to abortion in the Bible. My entire religious life, I was told abortion was evil because God said it was.

While I accept there are some bizarre secular people that believe abortion is murder (because an unfeeling, unthinking fetus that can be disposed of without suffering is worth utilitarian consideration) the majority to opposition to abortion comes from religion. The fact that the Bible says nothing on the issue (and indeed we often see the Jews committing mass murder and genocide in the OT) is just an example of how incoherent religion is.

That being said, anyone who opposes stem cell research is opposing treatment that could potentially save millions of lives (assuming they have the healthcare of course), making them ignorant fvcktards that aren't worth the dirt I scrape off my shoes. [/B]

While I neither oppose nor agree with stem cell research, it's clear from this nonsensical rant that your entire argument is basically based on emotion, as any philosophy major/liberal is often guilty of...

I don't impose my religious views on others who don't believe in God, but when secularists/atheists try to rant about how religion sucks and secularism is the answer, I just laugh and point to the rapid deterioration of society.

out of curiosity in what ways do you feel that society is deteriorating in comparison to how it was before?

The rise of moral relativism, the diminishing of personal responsibility in favor of placing the blame on societal and socioeconomic forces, MTV, social networks, etc.

if this thread didnt exist i wonder how many people would still come to this syb forum

i often wonder why i do anyway. 'krat, i'll get to you in the morning. I'm watching LOST. Midway through season 4.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
The rise of moral relativism, the diminishing of personal responsibility in favor of placing the blame on societal and socioeconomic forces, MTV, social networks, etc.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Did you know that people in the 50's hearkened for the good 'ol days of the 1920s? So many hates their current era and thinks the past was... better.

For the most part it's true. The roaring 20's were amazing but the apex of American civilization and really, civilization in general was achieved by us during the 1950s. Then the modern liberalism(hippie) movement appeared and things started slowly going to shit.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6910429.html

This would be interesting. Not that I approve it entirely but I would love to see it go up against liberal arts degrees in universities.

'Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio, said the proposed standards reflect the desires of his constituents to emphasize “personal responsibility and accountability” and “to honor our Founding Fathers, and our military.”

Mary Helen Berlanga, D-Corpus Christi, said the standards ignore the Ku Klux Klan in Texas, Texas Rangers “killing Mexican-Americans without justification” and the U.S. Army's role in the attempted extermination of American Indians.'

ermm Those are some pretty big things to miss out. You guys only have 400 or so years of history, it can't be that hard to fit everything in. Also, that first bit is very dodgy, history is meant to be objective, it shouldn't honor anything. And what are 'government textbooks'?