If Mort Divine ruled the world

You at some point seemed to be a reasonable person, but when you think that me having a rightfully angered response to "I'd rather get shot in the head then have a gay son" or "round up all the flamboyant gays and exterminate them" or any other of the fucked up things TB and Aug have been spewing is WORSE than those statements themselves...

Tolerance is not what either of them are doing.
Tolerance is actively tolerating even if something makes you uncomfortable and neither are doing that.

Good post Mort.
 
What makes you think i dont have children?

And just for the record i dont give a fuck when i see fags walking down the street ... what i do care about is the flamobyant fags who proudly showcase their sexuality in public. I dont want to see two guys kissing and groping each other in front of my kids ... having fag parades in whips and chains and shoving their fucking sexuality down our throats. And just to be clear, when i take my kids out, i dont want them to see anyone behaving like that ... regardless of their sexuality.

1) Because you've said you don't have kids. Or at least I think you did.
2) And straight groping in public is okay? I want neither gay nor straight people to grope each other in public.

I wouldn't want my son to be gay, but I wouldn't shame him if he was. I'd still love him.
 
So you are suggesting that dislike for homosexuality can be natural - that some people just feel disgust toward it. This isn't the case though. Disgust is a conditioned response.

Conditioned by? Other people? Who were conditioned by? Looks like it leads to infinite regress.

But it doesn't really matter anyway. Everything is just social convention so whoopty do. It doesn't matter if there is a reason, if "social convention" is a critique at all. Let's drop the euphemism and go ahead and just call "social convention" what it is, which is cultural relativism - which is ultimately useless because it yanks the rug out from under itself.
 
I suspect this highly important point I'm about to make will be ignored in the middle of a reply combo between NG and Einherjar but ...

any behavior that involves observing an action and not copying it involves a thought process, the default is to copy, so in a "homophobic society" it is "unnatural" not to be homophobic.

if you want evidence

(Social Neuroscience) Susan Hurley, Nick Chater (Editor)-Perspectives on Imitation_ From Neuroscience to Social Science - Volume 2_ Imitation, Human Development, and Culture (Social Neuroscience), Chapter 9 Why We are Social Animals

The PDF is on here: http://gen.lib.rus.ec/
 
Conditioned by? Other people? Who were conditioned by? Looks like it leads to infinite regress.

It does lead to infinite regress. We should stop seeing that as problem and see it as an answer. Unfortunately, you can't slap a label on this issue to designate an origin. The paradox of infinite regress is simply an aspect of observation, i.e. simply an aspect of existence itself. All rational efforts to establish an origin are dictated by ideological dynamics.

But it doesn't really matter anyway. Everything is just social convention so whoopty do. It doesn't matter if there is a reason, if "social convention" is a critique at all. Let's drop the euphemism and go ahead and just call "social convention" what it is, which is cultural relativism - which is ultimately useless because it yanks the rug out from under itself.

"Cultural relativism" is the slapstick naive label of democratic rationalism and Western neoliberalism. It's useless and hurtful to appeal to it today because it carries so much baggage.

The prime feature of the paradox detailed above is nothing like "cultural relativism," but a more radical critique of convention in the first place. Cultural relativism wants to justify and rationalize all social convention in the name of relativism; what I'm suggesting is the dissipation of convention in the name of paradox.

We should think of relativism not in the naive social sense, but in the scientific sense described by Einstein. Relativity as a constitutive aspect of the observable universe.
 
Postmodernism and a lot of post 1945 social science is basically some people in fairy suits dancing around the body of the White Male and it's mind melting. You probably give more of a shit if 10 million or 100 million random poor africans and asians starve in a given year than the average asian and black Westerners do. They care massively about symbolic bullshit relating to popular culture.
 
1) Because you've said you don't have kids. Or at least I think you did.
2) And straight groping in public is okay? I want neither gay nor straight people to grope each other in public.

I wouldn't want my son to be gay, but I wouldn't shame him if he was. I'd still love him.

1) I actually don't have kids and have never mentioned it here. I was just speaking hypothetically.

2) Did you miss the last part of my post you quoted? "And just to be clear, when i take my kids out, i dont want them to see anyone behaving like that ... regardless of their sexuality."


I wouldnt hate my son for being gay,

I never said i'd hate him. I'd hate myself for being a failure of a parent.

Good post Mort.

So you and Mort both clearly have no clue what the meaning of the words tolerance and approval are? You should help him finish writing that feminazi dictionary of his.
 
I wouldnt hate him either, i'd hate myself for being a failure of a parent.

You should hate yourself now for being an idiot. Sexuality isn't something parents have any control over. It is determined genetically. The only thing you'd do is fuck your child up psychologically and doom him to a life of unhappiness, daddy issues, and self loathing.

Also I love when people like you get all upset when you get called out for your hateful views. There is no room in society for tolerance of hateful bigotry. And it's only going to get worse for you, thankfully.
 
I'm never upset, sweetheart. That's something that's almost exclusive to the morts of this place ... you included. You're always steaming when replying to me when im always laughing my ass of reading your moronic posts.



--------------------------

Mathiäs;10989774 said:
You should hate yourself now for being an idiot.

......

Mathiäs;10989774 said:
It is determined genetically.

:lol:
 
I'm never upset, sweetheart. That's something that's almost exclusive to the morts of this place ... you included. You're always steaming when replying to me when im always laughing my ass of reading your moronic posts.



--------------------------



......



:lol:

You're probably a climate change denier too. I don't expect you to understand basic scientific concepts, but I will throw a timeless cliche at you: when exactly did you make the choice to be straight?

Also, nothing anyone has ever said on this forum has ever made me even remotely unhappy in any way lol. This is the interwebz. Get real dude.
 
Mathiäs;10989787 said:
You're probably a climate change denier too. I don't expect you to understand basic scientific concepts, but I will throw a timeless cliche at you: when exactly did you make the choice to be straight?

I didn't plan on being straight. When I was around 8, my mentality was "Maybe I'll get married one day, but I'm not gonna kiss the bride; that's just gross."
 
Mathiäs;10989787 said:
when exactly did you make the choice to be straight?


:facepalm: you truly are hopeless. That comment just shows that this is not something i can even come close to talking to you about. It'll be the equivalent of me talking to a brick wall ... a pretty soft ass one at that.

Mathiäs;10989787 said:
You're probably a climate change denier too. I don't expect you to understand basic scientific concepts, but I will throw a timeless cliche at you:


Lol, you guys and your same old broken stereotypical accusations. Yea bro, anyone that doesn't agree with you pansies is a an extreme right wing conservative ... please try using your fucking brain before putting your little pudgy fingers to the keyboard.

Anyone that denies climate change is a fucking moron. But no one can deny that nowadays it is a subject that is widely used in politics for other reasons. For example, you think the citys want us to cut back on the water because they actually give a fuck? No, they're saving millions of dollars and the fat suit lefties are just getting fatter by the day ... while you dumb ass lefties help them by going and blindly voting in every retarded proposition they have up in the elections. California is in a drought, but we've always been a dry state .... always. Anyone that lived here for over 20 years can tell you that there were hotter years in the 80's and 90's.
 
I thought they were still looking for the "gay gene/chromosone" ?

Yeah, I thought the prevailing thought was that it was related to hormone exposure during prenatal development

which still absolves parents from "making their kid gay" or some bullshit like that
 
:facepalm: you truly are hopeless. That comment just shows that this is not something i can even come close to talking to you about. It'll be the equivalent of me talking to a brick wall ... a pretty soft ass one at that.

Well then how about you explain to me 'why I'm so hopeless' instead of just throwing around insults? Do you really think that people wake up one day and decide to be a homosexual? Are you that stupid?

And whether or not its determined specifically by genetics or not, my point was that sexuality is determined before birth. Scientists universally agree on this for the most part.