Britain Children as young as SIX are to be given compulsory self-touching lessons that critics say are sexualising youngsters

[Shipmaster Sane]

No; no I wouldn't be.

Look, I'm as irritated with the modern left as any of you, but that doesn't mean I'm going to throw the baby out with the bathwater. At the end of the day; I'm not a conservative/right-winger. Not really a liberal/left-winger either, but I do have certain political beliefs that fall under both; and if you're going to demonize any and all left-leaning political ideas, and anyone who holds them, then you are demonizing me.

Ok, I'm demonizong you. You're wrong, and your beliefs are alternately nightmarish and fostered by ignorance.
The Only thing that separates the american left from its confederate roots is it's consistent push towardsthe genocidal philosophy of socialism.

 

[Terthna]

Ok, I'm demonizong you. You're wrong, and your beliefs are alternately nightmarish and fostered by ignorance.
The Only thing that separates the american left from its confederate roots is it's consistent push towardsthe genocidal philosophy of socialism.

You don't even know what my beliefs are, nor do you seem to care. You are no less a bigot than any of the leftists you despise, and the perfect example of why the enemy of my enemy is not my friend.

This is the third time I've had to deal with you; and I am not exactly charmed.

 

[Cherico]

You don't even know what my beliefs are, nor do you seem to care. You are no less a bigot than any of the leftists you despise, and the perfect example of why the enemy of my enemy is not my friend.

This is the third time I've had to deal with you; and I am not exactly charmed.

Can you tell us what your beliefs are?

Because that way we have a baseline, Im pretty sure your not what we talk about when we talk about 'leftist' you have to be pretty extreme to earn that lable.

 

[Terthna]

Can you tell us what your beliefs are?

Because that way we have a baseline, Im pretty sure your not what we talk about when we talk about 'leftist' you have to be pretty extreme to earn that lable.

I'll try to keep this brief. I believe gay marriage should remain legal. I believe people should have the right to have an abortion for any reason; I may not agree with their reason, depending on what it is, but I still think they should have the right. I believe freedom of speech is paramount, and should never be infringed upon; even in the private sector. I believe in welfare. I believe in environmentalism; not the dumb kind, but more "let's not defecate where we sleep". I believe in closing loopholes that are exclusively used by the rich to avoid paying the taxes they rightfully owe. I believe in the right to keep and bear arms, and that gun control is a stupid idea. I believe the free market is inherently flawed, and requires regulation to properly function; even then, sometimes nationalization becomes required when market failure occurs. I believe in Net Neutrality. I believe the duration of copyright should be drastically reduced, and made non-transferable. I believe in legalizing marijuana, as well as prostitution.

I could keep going, but I think that's enough for now. Please note however, that Shipmaster Sane said that all left ideas are evil; he made no distinction. As long as I hold even one position that's considered left-of-center, he has made it quite clear that he's perfectly fine with demonizing me.

 

[Cherico]

I'll try to keep this brief. I believe gay marriage should remain legal. I believe people should have the right to have an abortion for any reason; I may not agree with their reason, depending on what it is, but I still think they should have the right. I believe freedom of speech is paramount, and should never be infringed upon; even in the private sector. I believe in welfare. I believe in environmentalism; not the dumb kind, but more "let's not defecate where we sleep". I believe in closing loopholes that are exclusively used by the rich to avoid paying the taxes they rightfully owe. I believe in the right to keep and bear arms, and that gun control is a stupid idea. I believe the free market is inherently flawed, and requires regulation to properly function; even then, sometimes nationalization becomes required when market failure occurs. I believe in Net Neutrality. I believe the duration of copyright should be drastically reduced, and made non-transferable. I believe in legalizing marijuana, as well as prostitution.

I could keep going, but I think that's enough for now. Please note however, that Shipmaster Sane said that all left ideas are evil; he made no distinction. As long as I hold even one position that's considered left-of-center, he has made it quite clear that he's perfectly fine with demonizing me.

theres some stuff I agree with but not enough to really bitch about and I don't think theres anything crazy in what you said, your at the level were we can all live with you. Like I said when we say leftist we are not talking about normal people you have to earn that title. And even then we still find ways to tolerate actual communists.

As for blowback, keep in mind we get a lot of people who have been burned hard by the crazies, or who were knee deep in the SJW thing and then got the most painful backstab possible.

We have a term for it, the red pill rage, where you find out the hard way that the people who proclaimed themselves to be the good guys turn on you and you feel hurt betrayed and lash out hard. For some people that phase lasts a couple weeks, for some a couple months, and others a couple years. It takes time to drag yourself out of that hole and heal up.

 

[LordsFire]

I'll try to keep this brief. I believe gay marriage should remain legal. I believe people should have the right to have an abortion for any reason; I may not agree with their reason, depending on what it is, but I still think they should have the right. I believe freedom of speech is paramount, and should never be infringed upon; even in the private sector. I believe in welfare. I believe in environmentalism; not the dumb kind, but more "let's not defecate where we sleep". I believe in closing loopholes that are exclusively used by the rich to avoid paying the taxes they rightfully owe. I believe in the right to keep and bear arms, and that gun control is a stupid idea. I believe the free market is inherently flawed, and requires regulation to properly function; even then, sometimes nationalization becomes required when market failure occurs. I believe in Net Neutrality. I believe the duration of copyright should be drastically reduced, and made non-transferable. I believe in legalizing marijuana, as well as prostitution.

I could keep going, but I think that's enough for now. Please note however, that Shipmaster Sane said that all left ideas are evil; he made no distinction. As long as I hold even one position that's considered left-of-center, he has made it quite clear that he's perfectly fine with demonizing me.

This is quite the shotgun of different stances to take.

What is any of it based on though? What are your foundational principles?

To tie it back into the subject matter of the thread, what principle do you use to discern whether a form of sexual activity or expression is healthy or unhealthy?

 

[Terthna]

This is quite the shotgun of different stances to take.

What is any of it based on though? What are your foundational principles?

To tie it back into the subject matter of the thread, what principle do you use to discern whether a form of sexual activity or expression is healthy or unhealthy?

As I currently understand them, my foundational principles are that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are paramount; but since nobody can agree on what those things are, or how to achieve them, and often work at cross-purposes to do so, it is important for the state to step in and lay some ground rules, as well as arbitrate when necessary. Beyond that, my stances are "shotgun" because I try not to hold myself to any particular ideology, and I tend to take them on a case-by-case basis.

As for discerning whether a form of sexual activity or expression is healthy or unhealthy; the quick answer is, I don't. As long as all parties involved have given their consent (though there are some who cannot; like kids), or it's kept to the realm of fantasy; nothing else matters to me.

 

[LordsFire]

As I currently understand them, my foundational principles are that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are paramount; but since nobody can agree on what those things are, or how to achieve them, and often work at cross-purposes to do so, it is important for the state to step in and lay some ground rules, as well as arbitrate when necessary. Beyond that, my stances are "shotgun" because I try not to hold myself to any particular ideology, and I tend to take them on a case-by-case basis.

As for discerning whether a form of sexual activity or expression is healthy or unhealthy; the quick answer is, I don't. As long as all parties involved have given their consent (though there are some who cannot; like kids), or it's kept to the realm of fantasy; nothing else matters to me.

...If nobody can agree on what life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are (ironically something I disagree with you about), on what basis is the state going to be stepping in to make those rules?

Why do you try to not hold to any particular ideology?

 

[Terthna]

...If nobody can agree on what life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are (ironically something I disagree with you about), on what basis is the state going to be stepping in to make those rules?

I already told you; on a case-by-case basis. Like, for example; let's say I'm being forced by my employer, in the pursuit of their own happiness (otherwise known as money), to do something dangerous that threatens my life, without being compensated for the risk. The power dynamics involved dictate that my employer's pursuit of happiness, takes precedence over my worries about the threat to my life; but that's clearly wrong, isn't it?

Basically, the government should step in when the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness of two or more individuals are in conflict, and regulatory oversight is needed to properly balance things out.

Why do you try to not hold to any particular ideology?

Because none of them have all the answers, even though they like to pretend they do; yet they all usually have at least some good ideas.

 

[Morphic Tide]

Basically, the government should step in when the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness of two or more individuals are in conflict, and regulatory oversight is needed to properly balance things out.

I'd exclude the last one for being too subjective. When one person's actions impinge on the liberties of another, or form a threat to the health of others, that's when government should get involved. The limitations imposed on government across the world, and the utterly-ignored bylaws that are human rights, are all about life and liberty, but not happiness in itself.

The general thinking is that liberty, when limited from the contradictions behind the Paradox of Tolerance, will lead to happiness because people aren't in the habit of making themselves miserable. So ensuring liberty thusly ensures happiness for as many as possible, because they'll be free to pursue happiness as it means to them without any issues from personal differences in what it means to be happy.

 

[Doomsought]

As for discerning whether a form of sexual activity or expression is healthy or unhealthy; the quick answer is, I don't. As long as all parties involved have given their consent (though there are some who cannot; like kids), or it's kept to the realm of fantasy; nothing else matters to me.

I'm willing to say that quite a wide range of sexual behaviors are unhealthy, but when they become something that needs intervention is another matter entirely.

 

[LordsFire]

I already told you; on a case-by-case basis. Like, for example; let's say I'm being forced by my employer, in the pursuit of their own happiness (otherwise known as money), to do something dangerous that threatens my life, without being compensated for the risk. The power dynamics involved dictate that my employer's pursuit of happiness, takes precedence over my worries about the threat to my life; but that's clearly wrong, isn't it?

Basically, the government should step in when the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness of two or more individuals are in conflict, and regulatory oversight is needed to properly balance things out.

'That's clearly wrong.'
By what standard is it clearly wrong?

Because none of them have all the answers, even though they like to pretend they do; yet they all usually have at least some good ideas.

None of them have all the answers? How do you know this?

 

[Captain X]

Personally, I also don't hold to any particular ideology simply because I do not wish to become dogmatic.

 

[PsihoKekec]

because people aren't in the habit of making themselves miserable.

That is simply not true, lot of people make themselves miserable for various reasons and even more people deliberately make other people miserable for even greater variety of reasons.

 

[Hlaalu Agent]

That is simply not true, lot of people make themselves miserable for various reasons and even more people deliberately make other people miserable for even greater variety of reasons.

Indeed. People are often the authors of their own misfortune in our way or another. And hell is other people...

 

[Edgeplay_cgo]

I'm actually surprised by this. I thought the pedo rapists in the UK government wanted their victims to be totally clueless about sexual matters.

It's called grooming. they want the children ready for sexual exploitation as young as possible. Pedophilia and child trafficking have long been British family values. Our Democrat Fascists are making a big push to institute mandatory sexual grooming in American schools, too.

 

[Terthna]

'That's clearly wrong.'
By what standard is it clearly wrong?

None of them have all the answers? How do you know this?

Okay; where are you going with this line of questioning? Because it's starting to get pedantic.

 

[LordsFire]

Okay; where are you going with this line of questioning? Because it's starting to get pedantic.

I'm trying to figure out what your starting assumptions about life is. Like I said when I first asked, I want to know what your principles are, because I can't find any way to make your diverging conclusions logically compatible with each other.

 

[Deleted member]

@Terthna , he's asking you to go back to first principles and describe the foundation of why you believe what you believe.