Have we any right to be offended all the time?

We hear it all the time:

"I find that offensive"

What right do we have to be offended? What gives us the right to find so many things offensive? Who are we, some superior being who has to bang on all the time about what other people are allowed to say?
What is an offensive word or phrase anyway? What offends me may not offend you so who is right?
Sticks and stones may break your bones and words seem to absolutely floor you!

They are but words: lumps of shaped air that fall from your open mouth and drop into the atmosphere for someone to pick up. What we do with them is up to us.

We can choose to hold them inside of us and allow the shapes to mess around with our nerves or we can toss them back into the world to fall and fade into invisible shapes.

Why would you think you may be offended by someone else's choice of shaped air? Why would you deem yourself judge and jury to condemn someone's words when you can choose to drop them and allow them to free fall into oblivion?

Stop being offended. Stop the offender from invading your ear-shaped orifice and say:

"I find your mouth-shapes to be lacking in any solid and pretty formation, so I will hand them back to you for now, yet I won't take offence as the offence is not mine to take, only yours to give and I don't want it"


Just a thought.

I think it depends on how you define "taking offense" and what you think should be done about it.

In its mildest form, taking offense means simply disagreeing with someone. Surely we have the right to say, "I disagree, here's why" and that's a good thing for society. It's pretty much why sites like ours exist, too.

As far as what you do about it, that's trickier. There are obviously forms of speech that are bad for a community, "fire" in the crowded theater and whatnot. If you yell "fire" in a crowded theater and there isn't one, it's not my fault that I get upset that you just endangered people. It's pretty obviously better for society if we punish speech like that than to tell people, "Hey, that word 'fire' was just a shaped piece of air and you made something out of it."

I think the word 'offensive' has become largely hijacked to be honest, by those who claim 'I'm not PC' like those words are some defining badge of honour, they aren't.

Those words are the same as 'I don't care if I hurt anyone I'm going to stamp my ickle feeties n say what I want anyway!' ...

What is ironic about telling people they shouldn't take offense is that it actually challenges them to keep their opinion (their offense) to themselves. That is, even if you are offended, just shut up about it or we'll decry to as a whinger.

People get offended, it's a fact of life, and when someone is do they not have the right to say so? People fight againat offensive behaviour all the time but that would be difficult if we become unable to even express what we see as offensive through some misguided fear of being labelled 'politically correct'.

Exactly Eilzel, and the fact of the matter is, people who whine about others taking too much offense are often also the same people who take great offense to things like someone mocking Jesus, or to gay marriage, or whatnot ... we all take offense to things that affront our sense of right and wrong, it's human nature.

I don't know if this is what eddie was driving at, but I've always been interested in whether we can come up with a sort of objective morality. Veya and I have talked about this a lot, and I think he and I arrived at the idea that ultimately, "wrong" equals the things that tend to snuff out or oppress life, and "right" equals the things that tend to promote or elevate life. At least that's what I took away from it Even in that view, you still have prickly issues like abortion or the death penalty, which (for most people) force you to weigh two wrongs against one another.

Everyone should have the right to be offended and be offensive.

I think it really comes down to intent, saying something in jest or moments of anger should be allowed but when your saying to Kill or 'I don't think this type should live here' or 'I'm not gonna give any of them a job' that when it is a problem and people do need to pull the person up when they express that opinion. That is actually affecting someones life and livelihood.

@Ben
agree about the objective morality but as previously discussed there is just so many complexities and circumstances to take into account.

veya_victaous wrote:Everyone should have the right to be offended and be offensive.

I think it really comes down to intent, saying something in jest or moments of anger should be allowed but when your saying to Kill or 'I don't think this type should live here' or 'I'm not gonna give any of them a job' that when it is a problem and people do need to pull the person up when they express that opinion. That is actually affecting someones life and livelihood.

@Ben
agree about the objective morality but as previously discussed there is just so many complexities and circumstances to take into account.

Which means we still have so much more to figure out! Lucky us, we're not obsolete

Ben_Reilly wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:Everyone should have the right to be offended and be offensive.

I think it really comes down to intent, saying something in jest or moments of anger should be allowed but when your saying to Kill or 'I don't think this type should live here' or 'I'm not gonna give any of them a job' that when it is a problem and people do need to pull the person up when they express that opinion. That is actually affecting someones life and livelihood.

@Ben
agree about the objective morality but as previously discussed there is just so many complexities and circumstances to take into account.

Which means we still have so much more to figure out! Lucky us, we're not obsolete

Or are we obsolete   


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1BdQcJ2ZYY

Eilzel wrote:I think the word 'offensive' has become largely hijacked to be honest, by those who claim 'I'm not PC' like those words are some defining badge of honour, they aren't.

Those words are the same as 'I don't care if I hurt anyone I'm going to stamp my ickle feeties n say what I want anyway!' ...

What is ironic about telling people they shouldn't take offense is that it actually challenges them to keep their opinion (their offense) to themselves. That is, even if you are offended, just shut up about it or we'll decry to as a whinger.

People get offended, it's a fact of life, and when someone is do they not have the right to say so? People fight againat offensive behaviour all the time but that would be difficult if we become unable to even express what we see as offensive through some misguided fear of being labelled 'politically correct'.

i feel your pain

im offended by the hatred and bigotry of militant homosexuals like you, but every-time i speak up im labelled a homophobe

its it a lucky thing i never get offended by being labelled by silly little boys,or else i would never speak up against militant homosexual supremacists

smelly_bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:I think the word 'offensive' has become largely hijacked to be honest, by those who claim 'I'm not PC' like those words are some defining badge of honour, they aren't.

Those words are the same as 'I don't care if I hurt anyone I'm going to stamp my ickle feeties n say what I want anyway!' ...

What is ironic about telling people they shouldn't take offense is that it actually challenges them to keep their opinion (their offense) to themselves. That is, even if you are offended, just shut up about it or we'll decry to as a whinger.

People get offended, it's a fact of life, and when someone is do they not have the right to say so? People fight againat offensive behaviour all the time but that would be difficult if we become unable to even express what we see as offensive through some misguided fear of being labelled 'politically correct'.

i feel your pain

im offended by the hatred and bigotry of militant homosexuals like you, but every-time i speak up im labelled a homophobe

its it a lucky thing i never get offended by being labelled by silly little boys,or else i would never speak up against militant homosexual supremacists

I suggest you then make up with your brother then, I think that is what your biggest issue is being that you are Christian and you feel offended because he is more of a man than you will ever be.

Didge wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

i feel your pain

im offended by the hatred and bigotry of militant homosexuals like you, but every-time i speak up im labelled a homophobe

its it a lucky thing i never get offended by being labelled by silly little boys,or else i would never speak up against militant homosexual supremacists

I suggest you then make up with your brother then, I think that is what your biggest issue is being that you are Christian and you feel offended because he is more of a man than you will ever be.

tee hee

i love your knee jerk reactions

smelly_bandit wrote:

Didge wrote:


I suggest you then make up with your brother then, I think that is what your biggest issue is being that you are Christian and you feel offended because he is more of a man than you will ever be.

tee hee

i love your knee jerk reactions

Sorry to disappoint you there smelly chap, we know you are at odds with your brothers homosexuality, so much so you think homosexuality is extremism

Didge wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

tee hee

i love your knee jerk reactions

Sorry to disappoint you there smelly chap, we know you are at odds with your brothers homosexuality, so much so you think homosexuality is extremism

  

you're wired this morning didge

have a big night last night did you??

smelly_bandit wrote:

Didge wrote:


Sorry to disappoint you there smelly chap, we know you are at odds with your brothers homosexuality, so much so you think homosexuality is extremism

  

you're wired this morning didge

have a big night last night did you??

Excellent I knew smelly would deflect when beaten as he always does

happy days

Had a great night last night

It's a political thing. Look at the only countries where they have a large amount of censorship - all leftwing ones. The Left want control of people - of what they say, what they think - people must conform to their ideology, because of course they know best; they're right and everyone who disagrees with them is wrong. Simple really The funny thing is that often it's they who get offended more than the alleged victims - and funnier still is that most of these geniuses usually aren't endowed overmuch with the old grey cells...

Tesstacious wrote:It's a political thing.  Look at the only countries where they have a large amount of censorship - all leftwing ones.  The Left want control of people - of what they say, what they think - people must conform to their ideology, because of course they know best; they're right and everyone who disagrees with them is wrong.  Simple really  The funny thing is that often it's they who get offended more than the alleged victims - and funnier still is that most of these geniuses usually aren't endowed overmuch with the old grey cells...

That is complete rubbish, you will find censorship in both left and right wing governments, are you now claiming there was no censorship under the Nazis, the facsits, under Franco in Spain?

Didge wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:It's a political thing.  Look at the only countries where they have a large amount of censorship - all leftwing ones.  The Left want control of people - of what they say, what they think - people must conform to their ideology, because of course they know best; they're right and everyone who disagrees with them is wrong.  Simple really  The funny thing is that often it's they who get offended more than the alleged victims - and funnier still is that most of these geniuses usually aren't endowed overmuch with the old grey cells...

That is complete rubbish, you will find censorship in both left and right wing governments, are you now claiming there was no censorship under the Nazis, the facsits, under Franco in Spain?

The Nazis were the National Socialist Party! Franco was a dictator not a party! Fascists are a political concept not a party! Look around the world TODAY. Which countries want to have total control over it's people? Look locally - only today Eric Pickles has announces he's stopping leftie councils using spy cars and cameras for the purpose of raising money by targetting thousands of motorists, as they do. These cameras were supposed to be for people's safety...

Tesstacious wrote:

Didge wrote:


That is complete rubbish, you will find censorship in both left and right wing governments, are you now claiming there was no censorship under the Nazis, the facsits, under Franco in Spain?

The Nazis were the National Socialist Party!  Franco was a dictator not a party!  Fascists are a political concept not a party!  Look around the world TODAY.  Which countries want to have total control over it's people?    Look locally - only today Eric Pickles has announces he's stopping leftie councils using spy cars and cameras for the purpose of raising money by targetting thousands of motorists, as they do.  These cameras were supposed to be for people's safety...

Wrong, both the Nazi's and the Fascists in Italy were democratically elected and were all political parties, so that is a load of balderdash, I suggest you read up first on history and politics before you next answer Tess.
Thus we see examples of this no matter the government, left or right, how about under the Republicans Tess, do you think they have not censored anything?

fucking know all!!

nicko wrote:fucking know all!!

More childish abuse

come now tess

you know didge doesn't live in the here and now

for didge its all about the long distant past, its the only way he can twist the facts to argue anything

smelly_bandit wrote:come now tess

you know didge doesn't live in the here and now

for didge its all about the long distant past, its the only way he can twist the facts to argue anything  

Oh dear, poor smelly is left with his usual deflection to go on about the poster and not the point of the debate.

Exposed and busted again ha ha

Didge wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:
The Nazis were the National Socialist Party!  Franco was a dictator not a party!  Fascists are a political concept not a party!  Look around the world TODAY.  Which countries want to have total control over it's people?    Look locally - only today Eric Pickles has announces he's stopping leftie councils using spy cars and cameras for the purpose of raising money by targetting thousands of motorists, as they do.  These cameras were supposed to be for people's safety...

Wrong, both the Nazi's and the Fascists in Italy were democratically elected and were all political parties, so that is a load of balderdash, I suggest you read up first on history and politics before you next answer Tess.
Thus we see examples of this no matter the government, left or right, how about under the Republicans Tess, do you think they have not censored anything?

Iknow the Nazis were elected - as the National SOCIALIST Party, as I said! But ignore the rest of my post as usual. Which countries and parties ruling them in the world today with rampant censorship are right-wing? Go on - answer. Double dare you...

Tesstacious wrote:

Didge wrote:


Wrong, both the Nazi's and the Fascists in Italy were democratically elected and were all political parties, so that is a load of balderdash, I suggest you read up first on history and politics before you next answer Tess.
Thus we see examples of this no matter the government, left or right, how about under the Republicans Tess, do you think they have not censored anything?

Iknow the Nazis were elected - as the National SOCIALIST Party, as I said!  But ignore the rest of my post as usual.  Which countries and parties ruling them in the world today with rampant censorship are right-wing?  Go on - answer.  Double dare you...

How about the latest thread I put up today about India then Tess.

Whoops

whoops, i'v followed through, ha ha ha

nicko wrote:whoops, i'v followed through,  ha ha ha

You shit yourself?

Does happen at your age, do not be too hard on yourself.

smelly_bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:I think the word 'offensive' has become largely hijacked to be honest, by those who claim 'I'm not PC' like those words are some defining badge of honour, they aren't.

Those words are the same as 'I don't care if I hurt anyone I'm going to stamp my ickle feeties n say what I want anyway!' ...

What is ironic about telling people they shouldn't take offense is that it actually challenges them to keep their opinion (their offense) to themselves. That is, even if you are offended, just shut up about it or we'll decry to as a whinger.

People get offended, it's a fact of life, and when someone is do they not have the right to say so? People fight againat offensive behaviour all the time but that would be difficult if we become unable to even express what we see as offensive through some misguided fear of being labelled 'politically correct'.

i feel your pain

im offended by the hatred and bigotry of militant homosexuals like you, but every-time i speak up im labelled a homophobe

its it a lucky thing i never get offended by being labelled by silly little boys,or else i would never speak up against militant homosexual supremacists

Point to one concrete example of homosexual supremacy, or else stop bleating like a stupid animal ...

Tesstacious wrote:It's a political thing.  Look at the only countries where they have a large amount of censorship - all leftwing ones.  The Left want control of people - of what they say, what they think - people must conform to their ideology, because of course they know best; they're right and everyone who disagrees with them is wrong.  Simple really  The funny thing is that often it's they who get offended more than the alleged victims - and funnier still is that most of these geniuses usually aren't endowed overmuch with the old grey cells...

Come back when you understand the first thing about leftwing politics beyond the slurs thrown around without thought by the right. You're full of shit.

Tesstacious wrote:

Didge wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:
The Nazis were the National Socialist Party!  Franco was a dictator not a party!  Fascists are a political concept not a party!  Look around the world TODAY.  Which countries want to have total control over it's people?    Look locally - only today Eric Pickles has announces he's stopping leftie councils using spy cars and cameras for the purpose of raising money by targetting thousands of motorists, as they do.  These cameras were supposed to be for people's safety...

Wrong, both the Nazi's and the Fascists in Italy were democratically elected and were all political parties, so that is a load of balderdash, I suggest you read up first on history and politics before you next answer Tess.
Thus we see examples of this no matter the government, left or right, how about under the Republicans Tess, do you think they have not censored anything?

Iknow the Nazis were elected - as the National SOCIALIST Party, as I said!  But ignore the rest of my post as usual.  Which countries and parties ruling them in the world today with rampant censorship are right-wing?  Go on - answer.  Double dare you...

They called themselves socialist because it was popular in their country at the time, stop acting like an idiot. It's just like Bush & Co. called their law that makes it somehow legal to spy on American citizens the Patriot Act -- it sounds better, so more morons are likely to buy into it.

Serious question didge, why do you feel you have to be on this forum from morning till night? do you not have work to do? why do you post obscure c@p articles that no one gives a toss about. Do you feel that you must keep posting or we will forget you,[no chance of that] have some time off didge go out and get some fresh air, take up a hobby, or is posting on forums your hobby?

nicko wrote:Serious question didge, why do you feel you have to be on this forum from morning till night?  do you not have work to do? why do you post obscure c@p articles that no one gives a toss about. Do you feel that you must keep posting or we will forget you,[no chance of that] have some time off didge go out and get some fresh air, take up a hobby, or is posting on forums your hobby?

I am not on the forum morning till, night and easy check when I post over the last week would show that is complete gobbledygook and shows again you are acting like a child.
I am not here for a popularity contest either, but to put my view points across, whether you agree with them or not is your issue, not mine, you have to counter my views if you think they are wrong, not claim they are wrong, and is why you always go wrong.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:It's a political thing.  Look at the only countries where they have a large amount of censorship - all leftwing ones.  The Left want control of people - of what they say, what they think - people must conform to their ideology, because of course they know best; they're right and everyone who disagrees with them is wrong.  Simple really  The funny thing is that often it's they who get offended more than the alleged victims - and funnier still is that most of these geniuses usually aren't endowed overmuch with the old grey cells...

Come back when you understand the first thing about leftwing politics beyond the slurs thrown around without thought by the right. You're full of shit.

Wow - your sheep's clothing's slipping...

Point proved. I don't agree with you, therefore I'm full of shit. So go on, you answer the point I raised - which countries and governments in the world today that have excessive censorhip aren't left-wing? Give you a clue... China, North Korea...

nicko wrote:Serious question didge, why do you feel you have to be on this forum from morning till night?  do you not have work to do? why do you post obscure c@p articles that no one gives a toss about. Do you feel that you must keep posting or we will forget you,[no chance of that] have some time off didge go out and get some fresh air, take up a hobby, or is posting on forums your hobby?

Seems a rather bullshit question deflecting from the main issue, if you ask me (which you, to be fair, did not). There are all sorts of reasons someone might be on the forum at some times and not at others -- it seems I catch shit for not being on when I've got a hundred real-life things I have to deal with ...

Tesstacious wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:It's a political thing.  Look at the only countries where they have a large amount of censorship - all leftwing ones.  The Left want control of people - of what they say, what they think - people must conform to their ideology, because of course they know best; they're right and everyone who disagrees with them is wrong.  Simple really  The funny thing is that often it's they who get offended more than the alleged victims - and funnier still is that most of these geniuses usually aren't endowed overmuch with the old grey cells...

Come back when you understand the first thing about leftwing politics beyond the slurs thrown around without thought by the right. You're full of shit.

Wow - your sheep's clothing's slipping...  

Point proved.  I don't agree with you, therefore I'm full of shit.  So go on, you answer the point I raised - which countries and governments in the world today that have excessive censorhip aren't left-wing?   Give you a clue... China, North Korea...

OK, so if I don't support a totalitarian state, I'm not sufficiently left-wing?

Again -- BULLSHIT!

Tesstacious wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Come back when you understand the first thing about leftwing politics beyond the slurs thrown around without thought by the right. You're full of shit.

Wow - your sheep's clothing's slipping...  

Point proved.  I don't agree with you, therefore I'm full of shit.  So go on, you answer the point I raised - which countries and governments in the world today that have excessive censorhip aren't left-wing?   Give you a clue... China, North Korea...

How about India, did you miss that part, or Egypt?

Would you like some more, as there is plenty

There are right-wingers who think all drugs should be legal and that gay people should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want, Tess -- and there are other right-wingers who think those thoughts are too horrible to contemplate.

I suggest you not lump all left-wing ideology into the same group unless you want to be lumped in with the likes of Breivik and McVeigh. We're adults, are we not? Do we have to indulge in childish bullshit just because we disagree?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:
Wow - your sheep's clothing's slipping...  

Point proved.  I don't agree with you, therefore I'm full of shit.  So go on, you answer the point I raised - which countries and governments in the world today that have excessive censorhip aren't left-wing?   Give you a clue... China, North Korea...

OK, so if I don't support a totalitarian state, I'm not sufficiently left-wing?

Again -- BULLSHIT!

Usual Straw man reply - you never answered my question. therefore it's your reply that's BULLSHIT.

Didge wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:
Wow - your sheep's clothing's slipping...  

Point proved.  I don't agree with you, therefore I'm full of shit.  So go on, you answer the point I raised - which countries and governments in the world today that have excessive censorhip aren't left-wing?   Give you a clue... China, North Korea...

How about India, did you miss that part, or Egypt?

Would you like some more, as there is plenty

India is just stating that they want their people to speak the country's language rather than English - same as the Welsh do - I wouldn't put that in the same bracket as North Korea? Are you suggesting they'll execute anyone who speaks English?

Tesstacious wrote:

Didge wrote:


How about India, did you miss that part, or Egypt?

Would you like some more, as there is plenty

India is just stating that they want their people to speak the country's language rather than English - same as the Welsh do - I wouldn't put that in the same bracket as North Korea? Are you suggesting they'll execute anyone who speaks English?  

Fuck me, that is censorship ha ha

I never said they were in the same bracket as North Korea, but give it time Tess, when a Nationalist party is in power, as you will see further censorship happen.

Thus your view points is absurd, you have gone from going on about censorship here, which is nothing like North Korea, to now equating when I show other censorship to equate mine to North Korea?

That is daft, when already I have shown that Spain, Germany and Italy were heavily censored under extreme right wing governments.

Seriously do you even know what you post sometimes?

Tesstacious wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:
Wow - your sheep's clothing's slipping...  

Point proved.  I don't agree with you, therefore I'm full of shit.  So go on, you answer the point I raised - which countries and governments in the world today that have excessive censorhip aren't left-wing?   Give you a clue... China, North Korea...

OK, so if I don't support a totalitarian state, I'm not sufficiently left-wing?

Again -- BULLSHIT!

Usual Straw man reply - you never answered my question.  therefore it's your reply that's BULLSHIT.

Actually, you're the one straw-manning by labeling totalitarian states as somehow automatically leftist, yet refusing to acknowledge left-wing political parties such as my own, the Democratic Party in the U.S., which is always fending off attempts at censorship by the right-wing Republican Party (you know, the ones who say we have to ban violent video games and movies because they somehow make people go on shooting sprees).

You're just cheering for clothes at this point     



(For Cass -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=we-L7w1K5Zo )

Tesstacious wrote:

Didge wrote:


How about India, did you miss that part, or Egypt?

Would you like some more, as there is plenty

India is just stating that they want their people to speak the country's language rather than English - same as the Welsh do - I wouldn't put that in the same bracket as North Korea? Are you suggesting they'll execute anyone who speaks English?  

The people of India have never spoken English!

Have you never rang a bloody call centre Tesstacious?!

Ben_Reilly wrote:Exactly Eilzel, and the fact of the matter is, people who whine about others taking too much offense are often also the same people who take great offense to things like someone mocking Jesus, or to gay marriage, or whatnot ... we all take offense to things that affront our sense of right and wrong, it's human nature.

I don't know if this is what eddie was driving at, but I've always been interested in whether we can come up with a sort of objective morality. Veya and I have talked about this a lot, and I think he and I arrived at the idea that ultimately, "wrong" equals the things that tend to snuff out or oppress life, and "right" equals the things that tend to promote or elevate life. At least that's what I took away from it Even in that view, you still have prickly issues like abortion or the death penalty, which (for most people) force you to weigh two wrongs against one another.

The morality argument fascinates me Ben. However in truth I believe there is no such thing as 'objective morality'. The fact is morality changes over time. What was right in the past may seem horrific today and likewise much of what we see as good now would have been abhorred in the past.

^TESS, by your defining the Nazis as 'Left Wing' purely because they have the word 'socialist' in their name, I assume you also consider the Democratic Republic of Korea (that's North Korea btw) to be a real 'democracy'   

And another thing, Tess -- you have me, the supposed lefty socialist Muslim-appeasing Marx-lover sitting here saying that I oppose censorship. So if you want to make this into yet another boring partisan left v. right circle-jerk merry-go-round, count me out. I thought we were actually talking about an idea, not engaging in yet another battle in the endless war over whether liberals or conservatives are better ...

Eilzel wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Exactly Eilzel, and the fact of the matter is, people who whine about others taking too much offense are often also the same people who take great offense to things like someone mocking Jesus, or to gay marriage, or whatnot ... we all take offense to things that affront our sense of right and wrong, it's human nature.

I don't know if this is what eddie was driving at, but I've always been interested in whether we can come up with a sort of objective morality. Veya and I have talked about this a lot, and I think he and I arrived at the idea that ultimately, "wrong" equals the things that tend to snuff out or oppress life, and "right" equals the things that tend to promote or elevate life. At least that's what I took away from it Even in that view, you still have prickly issues like abortion or the death penalty, which (for most people) force you to weigh two wrongs against one another.

The morality argument fascinates me Ben. However in truth I believe there is no such thing as 'objective morality'. The fact is morality changes over time. What was right in the past may seem horrific today and likewise much of what we see as good now would have been abhorred in the past.

^TESS, by your defining the Nazis as 'Left Wing' purely because they have the word 'socialist' in their name, I assume you also consider the Democratic Republic of Korea (that's North Korea btw) to be a real 'democracy'   

No Eli.

Unfortunately some modern "cool kids" see any policy to do with immigration as making a political Party right wing - UKIP - one policy, immigration - right wing.

Every other policy is left wing - much moreso than Liebour.

Eilzel wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Exactly Eilzel, and the fact of the matter is, people who whine about others taking too much offense are often also the same people who take great offense to things like someone mocking Jesus, or to gay marriage, or whatnot ... we all take offense to things that affront our sense of right and wrong, it's human nature.

I don't know if this is what eddie was driving at, but I've always been interested in whether we can come up with a sort of objective morality. Veya and I have talked about this a lot, and I think he and I arrived at the idea that ultimately, "wrong" equals the things that tend to snuff out or oppress life, and "right" equals the things that tend to promote or elevate life. At least that's what I took away from it Even in that view, you still have prickly issues like abortion or the death penalty, which (for most people) force you to weigh two wrongs against one another.

The morality argument fascinates me Ben. However in truth I believe there is no such thing as 'objective morality'. The fact is morality changes over time. What was right in the past may seem horrific today and likewise much of what we see as good now would have been abhorred in the past.

^TESS, by your defining the Nazis as 'Left Wing' purely because they have the word 'socialist' in their name, I assume you also consider the Democratic Republic of Korea (that's North Korea btw) to be a real 'democracy'   

Great. Fucking. Point.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

i feel your pain

im offended by the hatred and bigotry of militant homosexuals like you, but every-time i speak up im labelled a homophobe

its it a lucky thing i never get offended by being labelled by silly little boys,or else i would never speak up against militant homosexual supremacists

Point to one concrete example of homosexual supremacy, or else stop bleating like a stupid animal ...

elizel

elziel expressed the view that religious beliefs are subordinate to sexual preference

his words were to the effect of "religious views and beliefs need to take a back seat"

ironically he was making this declaration in between patting himself on the back for being such a champion of equality

the greater irony is of course that he claims to champion equality and yet calls for religious people to suffer the same alienation and suppression that gays once suffered

in the case of the B&B owners refuse to allow to unmarried gays to share a room, he was in full support of their persecution, citing the fact that they didn't recognize gays as being married for a reason to accuse them of bigotry and persecute them

once again the irony is that gay marriage has only just been recognized legally, so yeah good one

of course ben im sure you wont care, because like most lefties you have an enormous amount of tolerance for hatred and bigotry , but only the right kind of hatred and bigotry, the kind you approve of, the kind that is only directed at groups you disprove of

any other kind of hatred and bigoty is simply not acceptable to you

think im wrong??

i doubt you will call for a compromise between religious views and sexual preferences, no you will simply defend elizel, condemn religion, call me a homophobe and run away thinking you have the moral high ground

BigAndy9 wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

The morality argument fascinates me Ben. However in truth I believe there is no such thing as 'objective morality'. The fact is morality changes over time. What was right in the past may seem horrific today and likewise much of what we see as good now would have been abhorred in the past.

^TESS, by your defining the Nazis as 'Left Wing' purely because they have the word 'socialist' in their name, I assume you also consider the Democratic Republic of Korea (that's North Korea btw) to be a real 'democracy'   

No Eli.

Unfortunately some modern "cool kids" see any policy to do with immigration as making a political Party right wing - UKIP - one policy, immigration - right wing.

Every other policy is left wing - much moreso than Liebour.

I've never heard of a LW UKIP policy Andy. The BNP are, incredibly Left Wing on economic issues. But UKIP, with their pro-privatizing, lower tax rates for the rich etc, they are the most RW party with a chance of sniffing a seat at Westminster next year.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Exactly Eilzel, and the fact of the matter is, people who whine about others taking too much offense are often also the same people who take great offense to things like someone mocking Jesus, or to gay marriage, or whatnot ... we all take offense to things that affront our sense of right and wrong, it's human nature.

I don't know if this is what eddie was driving at, but I've always been interested in whether we can come up with a sort of objective morality. Veya and I have talked about this a lot, and I think he and I arrived at the idea that ultimately, "wrong" equals the things that tend to snuff out or oppress life, and "right" equals the things that tend to promote or elevate life. At least that's what I took away from it Even in that view, you still have prickly issues like abortion or the death penalty, which (for most people) force you to weigh two wrongs against one another.

The morality argument fascinates me Ben. However in truth I believe there is no such thing as 'objective morality'. The fact is morality changes over time. What was right in the past may seem horrific today and likewise much of what we see as good now would have been abhorred in the past.

^TESS, by your defining the Nazis as 'Left Wing' purely because they have the word 'socialist' in their name, I assume you also consider the Democratic Republic of Korea (that's North Korea btw) to be a real 'democracy'   

No Eli.

Unfortunately some modern "cool kids" see any policy to do with immigration as making a political Party right wing - UKIP - one policy, immigration - right wing.

Every other policy is left wing - much moreso than Liebour.

You ever take an objective look at your own house and see how prejudiced it sounds in the headlines, Andy?

After all, you're the guy who has admitted to forming all your opinions about Muslims and "foreigners" based on news media reports.

So by the same token, every news media report about the latest UKIP bigot who finally went full-on retard and actually said what they meant MUST be an accurate reflection of the conservative movement!

Christ on a bike smelly I can just imagine you foaming at the mouth every time you bring the old B&B owners up. You are of course twisting my argument then by trying to use that as an example of 'homosexual supremacy' but you aren't worth my effort getting into the same old exchange on the issue to be honest. Go find another poster to play chase with

Eilzel wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


No Eli.

Unfortunately some modern "cool kids" see any policy to do with immigration as making a political Party right wing - UKIP - one policy, immigration - right wing.

Every other policy is left wing - much moreso than Liebour.

I've never heard of a LW UKIP policy Andy. The BNP are, incredibly Left Wing on economic issues. But UKIP, with their pro-privatizing, lower tax rates for the rich etc, they are the most RW party with a chance of sniffing a seat at Westminster next year.

I have printed their ultra left wing policies here several times.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


No Eli.

Unfortunately some modern "cool kids" see any policy to do with immigration as making a political Party right wing - UKIP - one policy, immigration - right wing.

Every other policy is left wing - much moreso than Liebour.

You ever take an objective look at your own house and see how prejudiced it sounds in the headlines, Andy?

After all, you're the guy who has admitted to forming all your opinions about Muslims and "foreigners" based on news media reports.

So by the same token, every news media report about the latest UKIP bigot who finally went full-on retard and actually said what they meant MUST be an accurate reflection of the conservative movement!

Please point me to this Benji.