Random Politics & Religion #14

[-]
Poor joke, go to sleep Seha.

Back reads Niko's mind:

"Dinosaurs tossing hand grenades while riding garbage trucks that cause earthquakes and voter fraud"

Ben Carson is actually a really great case study in how someone can be brilliant yet still fall prey to really stupid ***.

Maybe? I'm not religious but Pascal's Wager is a decent bet to make for the thinking-type. 1% chance of success vs assumed 0% chance of success works in your odds.

Trolling CNN:

It never ends with the trolling of CNN:

Someone please help me who is the 4 Chan and how do we get in contact with him ?

I believe I can answer that for them.

With both, they won't say it should be illegal, but they will having differing viewpoints as to the limitations of gay marriage.

With Savael, he will accept gay marriages, but he doesn't like forcing businesses into celebrating or even supplying said marriages if it goes against their religion.

With Nausi, he will accept gay marriages, but only on paper. Maybe even go as far as allowing same-sex couples marriage rights (tax classifications, dual participation on insurance, so-on), but to the extent of marriages in non-community property state laws. Meaning that both partners' legal ownership and filing abilities are limited as if they were filling as singles. Also, with Savael, not forcing businesses to participate if they choose not to.

I'm probably wrong, but this is my impressions of their answers based on their viewpoints in the past.

You would be too.

And it's not going to help anything in the long run to silence people, even if their views are backward and frankly repulsive to anyone with a shred of common human decency.

But you can't reason with anyone whilst simultaneously cutting off their ability to express themselves. To do so will simply cause them to insulate within their own groups, bounce things around in the echo chamber for a while, make themselves more convinced they're right, and then double down on their own 'ideals.'

See also: the younger individuals on the left with their safe spaces and trigger warnings.

/agree

Why Twitter's Alt-Right Banning Campaign Will Become The Alt-Right's Best Recruitment Tool

However, this is also twitters right as a private company.

Google adsense, facebook, twitter, apple store, etc all have censorship policies in place that are HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE.

While some people are offended by racial language others are offended by profanity or naked pictures (including classical statues). Both sides have become ridiculous, and this is what happens when you start down the censorship path...at what point do you stop?

It's not just the Alt-Right that would benefit from being censored also.

Having ISIS being censored also helps in their cause. It's the exact same concept.

....well ***. Incoming "Alt-Right is a terrorist group" logical fallacy that CJ will make now. Calling it!

The only thing that should be cracked on is things that incite to violence. Something like "I'm better than black people cause I'm white" is stupid but not to be censored.

And that has happened.
Twitter Suspends Hundreds Of Thousands Of Terrorist Accounts, Gives Everyone Its 'Quality Filter'

Everytime we restrict someones opinion* (as in not allowing it to be shared, not restricting other peoples reaction to that opinion) that can be used to confirm that the "truth" is being repressed or some other confirmation crap.

Allow it, allow others to comment on it, etc.

*opinion is not the same as inciting violence.

Yes, there is a supreme court case that strictly defines this.

Fake and uncredited news should be censored, but not opinionated pieces.

Saying stupid ***will always be a staple of the human race.

It's better to socially shame the offender to force them internally to change than it is to outright censor them. Although, we come up with another issue: bullying.

There is no happy medium in this case. We should alert the offender that their opinion is wrong and explain why it is wrong, but not in a way that completely censors or enrages the offender into thinking that they are a social martyr.

No, they shouldn't be.

Who gets to decide what facts I don't like is?

Journalists should do research (do their jobs) and consumers should also do research (due diligence).

Don't tell people Huff Post's business model then everyone will copy it !

Yea and people should eat right and exercise how is that working out for America ?

Bullying online is easily remedied, remove yourself from that online atmosphere.

People are asshats, especially when they can be anonymous. Deal with it or remove yourself.

Bullying irl is different.

Censoring a person is different than socially shaming them. If you want to speak your mind go ahead, but you are not free of the social (or possibly the economic from work) consequences of this.

And a subset to that issue: what is bullying, what is unnecessary shaming, and what is people playing the victim?

See: fat advocacy people who feel shamed because someone proud of their lost weight posted a before/after picture.

Before you know it FFXIAH will evolve into a Huff Post like opinion website...wait it already happened !

Do you for for the FFXIAH daily observer now ?

Edit work*