Validity of Left-Right Divide Concerns

[Lord Sovereign]

Personally? I don't see a point in having a king just to wave his hand around, suck up taxpayer money and look pretty for the cameras. Sounds like Hollywood celebrities with extra steps.

Fair enough, but I meant more along the lines of the 17th and 18th centuries, especially in Britain and England. Whilst the crown does the ruling and acts as the main body of government, there are things it can and cannot do. And the King has to answer to Parliament, which represents the will of his people. He has no choice in the matter as Parliament controls the purse strings.

Hardly ideal, but I could actually see that system healthily functioning beyond a few years...unlike Socialism.

Oh and just to check, if I'm derailing things a little bit, sorry. I get carried away talking about Kings because they are cool.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

If you'd like to set aside other people's arguments with you for a moment then, what would your response to the links I posted a couple pages back be?

You posted those after I had withdrawn and gone to bed. I will look over what you've linked and respond presently.

 

[GoldRanger]

*sigh* Apparently, the actual answer to, "Okay, this argument is getting heated and non-constructive. Can we shake hands and walk away at least for now?" is, "No, fuck you!"

If I was "gaslighting", I'd be claiming that you're wrong about your own observations. I am explicitly NOT doing that. I am saying that my take on the situation, based on firsthand observation in person, and not based on trusting the mainstream media's presentation of matters, is this.

Since that conflicts with your interpretation of what you've seen, I am willing to discuss that discrepancy, without assuming that you're lying about what you saw, or that you're part of some crazy conservative conspiracy against liberals, or really anything other than people sitting down as individuals in good faith, and discussing their differences of opinion.

Not to necessarily side with Bacle or Roci here, but your post here is no go either.

Nobody is denying that you saw what you saw, or say that you're lying. We're denying that what you saw has much of a value in determining what's happening, even if every single vowel is true. Which we repeated throughout this thread, many times, with supporting arguments.

I think I'm going to start marking your strawmen in red from now on. It would be easier to keep track of them that way. Jesus.

 

[Rocinante]

We literally kept telling you we aren't talking about Portland, and you kept talking about Portland. You used Portland to say my claims weren't true. Claims to which Lordsfire has now provided links to prove.

And I kept telling you I am not talking about just Portland.

you were not arguing in good faith. You were claiming I was wrong based on your singular experience in one city, when I was clear that I wasn't talking about just Portland.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

I've already said it, and I'll say it again: I unambiguously and without reservation condemn the use of unlawful violence to further political agendas, including political agendas I would otherwise agree with. I do not believe that violence is acceptable "for me but not for thee". I consider violence against property to be far less serious than violence against persons, but it's still criminal activity, and it's wrong. I include things like shooting paintball guns and pepper spray as violence; in this, I disagree with President Trump, who offhandedly dismissed those particular activities as not really serious violence. They are, self-evidently, far less serious than shooting people with firearms, but I still class them as unacceptable political violence. Likewise shooting fireworks at the police, which *yes*, I have witnessed Portland protesters doing. It's laughably ineffective, but it's still intended as violence, and I condemn it as such.

Even before @LordsFire posted actual video content (for which I thank him), I was entirely willing to take your word for it that the content existed as you described it. The reason I'm emphasizing my personal experience in Portland is specifically because I'm actually agreeing with you about not trusting the mainstream media accounts. Are you seriously arguing that's unreasonable of me?

Personal nastiness aside, I will point out that given that @Rocinante outright agreed that "95% of what I saw live were indeed peaceful protests", I do not think we are actually disagreeing on the extent of the violence. We are disagreeing on *interpreting* that; specifically, the extent to which that violent subset can be said to characterize the protests as a whole.

From this comes the degree of moral responsibility which protesters at large over violent acts which they did not actually commit. I'm saying that I am holding this to the same standard that I have used in judging right wing (Patriot Prayer, etc.) protests here: the people *actually committing violence* are to blame for their own actions. The people who *directly enable* violence -- stockpiling weapons, etc -- are equally to blame. The people who *indirectly but actually support violence* are also to blame for their support.

Is that enough of a condemnation of violence to satisfy you?

Edit: Gah, accidentally hit shift+enter or something. Now I need to edit the rest of my post in. . . hold on, please.

 

[Rocinante]

You're still not admitting that violence and riots happened all summer across the country, by mostly left wing activists.

Edit: you have HEAVILY edited your post since I've posted this. Rather than responding to me, and that's just another example of your bad faith bullshit.

 

[Bear Ribs]

You're still not admitting that violence and riots happened all summer across the country, by mostly left wing activists.

That's not fair, @ShadowArxxy didn't say the violence and riots didn't happen, He (She? Not sure) said they weren't typical. Which is debatable but seems at least truth-adjacent in that there have been actual non-violent protests and the sticking point is what the ratio is which isn't clear.

 

[StormEagle]

I guess then the questions are?

1. Have we crossed the rubicon?

2. Can we step back from this?

3. Where and how does this end?

1. Yes, I fully believe we crossed the Rubicon. Where exactly it happened is up for debate, I personally believe it was either the Iraq war or the Bill Clinton Blowjob Fiasco that began the push over the river, but I find it beyond debate that we’ve marched ourselves over the river.

2. No, I don’t think there is a way to drag us back from the brink. The left, as a collective not every individual, believes the right wing of this country to be literal nazis out to gas the Jews again.

The right, meanwhile, has come to see the left as an outright evil force in American politics that is dangerous if not an outright existential threat to the nation as we know it. Something I personally believe as well.

When both sides believe the other to be duplicitous, murderous scumbags bereft of all merit or even common humanity, there can be no compromise made.

This is an outright existential crisis for the republic, in my opinion.

The question shouldn't be can we step back at this stage. To me, the answer to that is a definitive no.

The question should be what can we rebuild when this is all over.

3. I think fears of outright civil war are, for now, overblown. What I do predict is ever greater civil strife and societal breakdown that may lead to civil war eventually.

This all depends on how, specifically, the election pans out. Those hoping for a return to normalcy under Biden are fools or lying to themselves.

Biden is, at the very best, postponing the issue for two years. If he even lasts that long in the presidency. I do not think he’ll manage a full term if elected.

He’s the equivalent of putting wallpaper over termite infested wood. It fixes nothing, and solves none of the underlying issues.

A return to the good feelings of the 90’s and early 2000’s is an idiots hope. There will not be a return to normalcy, because none of the Democrat party elites are interested in an actual return to normalcy.

This election decides the fate of the nation going forward and, regardless of the outcome, things will never be the same again.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

That's not fair, @ShadowArxxy didn't say the violence and riots didn't happen, He (She? Not sure) said they weren't typical. Which is debatable but seems at least truth-adjacent in that there have been actual non-violent protests and the sticking point is what the ratio is which isn't clear.

She, thank you very much.

I don't think the sticking point is actually the ratio, given that @Rocinante said he saw 95% peaceful on the live feeds he was talking about; the sticking point is diffusion of responsibility.

What I'm arguing is this:

1. Based on my firsthand observation of protest activity here in Portland, violence *is* happening, but the protests are not *entirely* violent, and there is a surprisingly clearcut distinction between the entirely peaceful rallies that have been held in the early evenings, and the more angry and aggressive protests that happen after dark. The peaceful rallies are much, much larger, and pretty much all of those people go home afterwards. And then even with the more aggressive night protests, people are mostly yelling and shouting and shoving on the barricades. Vandalism has happened, violence has happened. But they are not all that is going on, even then.

2. Multiple right wing sources, including no less than the *President himself*, have repeatedly identified Portland as one of the "worst case" examples. Yes, we're not talking only about Portland. Is it not reasonable for me to conclude that since Portland has been clearly and unambiguously identified as a "worst case" example by people who are not in favor of the protests, the level of violence witnessed here is not far less than elsewhere? Obviously, specific incidents which happened elsewhere did not happen here; that's not what I'm talking about.

3. It's been argued that the media and/or Mayor Wheeler have been significantly downplaying the violence. That's why I'm relying primarily on my own observation. The violence *is* worse than Wheeler wants to admit; it is not, however, as bad as many are arguing. That's a general argument to generalities, not claiming you didn't see what you saw. Just as you also have argued to generalities about "the left".

4. Contrary to the claim that "no one on the left condemns this": I have condemned it. Many local groups have condemned it. Even *BLM* has condemned it, saying that other groups have pretty much *hijacked* the protests as a whole. I know that's probably a more ambiguous condemnation than you want, but it is there.

5. Yes, it doesn't collectively matter that I, a random individual, have condemned it. It matters individually, because you're talking to me. I don't think it's fair or reasonable to basically say that I have to answer for all violence on the left, but at the same time, I'm not allowed to actually answer, and therefore all the left is bad, period.

 

[LordSunhawk]

You're still not admitting that violence and riots happened all summer across the country, by mostly left wing activists.

Edit: you have HEAVILY edited your post since I've posted this. Rather than responding to me, and that's just another example of your bad faith bullshit.

Not taking sides, but I would like to point out the last line of ShadowArxxy's post. I suspect that she hit tab and then enter thinking she was shift-entering, and mistakenly posted. Do recall that the original post did have a very odd sentence fragment at the end as support for this supposition.

Now I will leave you to your (hopefully) civil debate. Carry on.

 

[GoldRanger]

She, thank you very much.

I don't think the sticking point is actually the ratio, given that @Rocinante said he saw 95% peaceful on the live feeds he was talking about; the sticking point is diffusion of responsibility.

What I'm arguing is this:

1. Based on my firsthand observation of protest activity here in Portland, violence *is* happening, but the protests are not *entirely* violent, and there is a surprisingly clearcut distinction between the entirely peaceful rallies that have been held in the early evenings, and the more angry and aggressive protests that happen after dark. The peaceful rallies are much, much larger, and pretty much all of those people go home afterwards. And then even with the more aggressive night protests, people are mostly yelling and shouting and shoving on the barricades. Vandalism has happened, violence has happened. But they are not all that is going on, even then.

This is completely irrelevant. The riots could be 0.01% of the whole, as long as they cause tremendous damage and loss of life (be forewarned that I will not accept any attempt to minimize that, given the video evidence we have), and BLM's, the media's and the Democrst's unconditional support of them (Biden's milquetoast token "condemnation" of "bothsides" doesn't count), the rioters are the left and the left are the rioters.

2. Multiple right wing sources, including no less than the *President himself*, have repeatedly identified Portland as one of the "worst case" examples. Yes, we're not talking only about Portland. Is it not reasonable for me to conclude that since Portland has been clearly and unambiguously identified as a "worst case" example by people who are not in favor of the protests, the level of violence witnessed here is not far less than elsewhere? Obviously, specific incidents which happened elsewhere did not happen here; that's not what I'm talking about.

Yes, it is. I still maintain that as a single person that can be in a single place at a single time, your eyewitness account is unreliable and not worth considering.

3. It's been argued that the media and/or Mayor Wheeler have been significantly downplaying the violence. That's why I'm relying primarily on my own observation. The violence *is* worse than Wheeler wants to admit; it is not, however, as bad as many are arguing. That's a general argument to generalities, not claiming you didn't see what you saw. Just as you also have argued to generalities about "the left".

See above.

4. Contrary to the claim that "no one on the left condemns this": I have condemned it. Many local groups have condemned it. Even *BLM* has condemned it, saying that other groups have pretty much *hijacked* the protests as a whole. I know that's probably a more ambiguous condemnation than you want, but it is there.

You are nobody. Nobody cares about you or your condemnation.

The media (CNN, ABC, MSNBC, others) has been covering for the violent rioters, first calling them a "white supremacist provocation" (for which, until this very day, there is no evidence), then switching the narrative to "the riots are justified". All throughout they have tried to downplay and minimize them, like you're doing right now.

I will repeat that it doesn't matter if the rioters are 5%, 1% or 0.01% of the protesters, what matters is the damage they cause, and the reaction the elicit from the larger organizations on the left. Trump has certainly got plenty of shit over the tiny sliver of genuine white supremacists that support him. The left should be judged by the same standards.

Only very recently have the media started making, small, reluctant concessions to the notion that the riots are indeed real, people indeed care about them, and they are indeed without justification. Not until polls have shown that the public is overwhelmingly opposed to them, and supporting them makes the Dems look bad.

The Democratic party has been donating to bail out rioters.

DAs in blue districts have refused to prosecute rioters, even when there's clear video evidence. No explanation is given to the public.

The rioters are extremely well organized. This is no "raw outburst of emotion". Brick pallets are distributed through their route hours beforehand, as recorded in pictures, video and witness accounts. They always come prepared with shields, gas masks and other protective equipment. Unedited video recordings of a Bernie Sanders primary campaign senior staff member has predicted these riots months before they actually occurred, implying coordination and premeditation.

I didn't hear of BLM condemning them. I did hear their overwhelming support for them.

NY Black Lives Matter leader speaks on protests, riots after returning from Minneapolis

ALBANY NY (WRGB) - The death of George Floyd has created a rift between police and the community. Across the country, members of the Black Lives Matter movement are speaking out and taking peaceful action in the wake of Floyd’s death. The president of the local black lives matter movement in New...

cbs6albany.com

“When the fires were burning, and people were chanting, I just felt liberated for a brief moment, and I felt for one of the only times in my life that the government had no control over me," said Newsome.

This same Newsome called riots "The language of the unheard" in February, before the protests started, by the way. Riots, explicitly, not protests.

Black Lives Matter organizer calls Chicago looting ‘reparation’

A Chicago Black Lives Matter organizer defended the widespread weekend looting in the heart of the Windy City — as “reparation.” “I don’t care if somebody decides to loot a Gucci’s or a Macy’s or a…

nypost.com

“I don’t care if somebody decides to loot a Gucci’s or a Macy’s or a Nike because that makes sure that that person eats. That makes sure that that person has clothes,” Ariel Atkins said at a rally outside the South Loop police station Monday, local outlets reported.

“That’s a reparation,” Atkins said. “Anything they want to take, take it because these businesses have insurance.”

Black Lives Matter on Chicago Looting: Black Lives ‘More Important Than Downtown Corporations'

Members of the Black Lives Matter Chicago chapter issued a statement Monday on the looting and unrest that erupted in the city following what police said was misinformation regarding a police-involved shooting. The group, which also held a solidarity rally on Monday night for those arrested...

www.nbcchicago.com

"These corporations have “looted” more from our communities than a few protesters ever could, yet the Mayor reserves her anger for the latter," the statement reads.

The group called for "an outlet for the people to exert control over the policing of their community."

"Over the past few months, too many people — disproportionately Black and Brown — have lost their jobs, lost their income, lost their homes, and lost their lives as the city has done nothing and the Chicago elite have profited," the statement reads. "When protesters attack high-end retail stores that are owned by the wealthy and service the wealthy, that is not 'our' city and has never been meant for us. The mayor cannot expect people to play by her rules as she refuses to treat them with basic dignity. These protests can only end when the safety and wellbeing of our communities is finally prioritized."

Etc. etc. A couple of milquetoast condemnations months after this started will not suffice. The organization should be screaming the condemnations from every rooftop, on the front of their website, in every interview. And heads should roll over this. People have been shot dead in the street because of them FFS.

And we haven't even touched upon the open Marxism and black supremacism of this vile organization.

5. Yes, it doesn't collectively matter that I, a random individual, have condemned it. It matters individually, because you're talking to me. I don't think it's fair or reasonable to basically say that I have to answer for all violence on the left, but at the same time, I'm not allowed to actually answer, and therefore all the left is bad, period.

It's starting to look like Roci and Bacle were right about you being a gaslighter. I'm getting annoyed at your attempts at victimhood narrative, honestly. Poor, poor misunderstood ShadowArxxy. Listen, when we say "the left", we don't mean "100% of individuals that hold a singular left-wing belief in the observable universe". We mean left-wing dominated institutions and organizations. Which should be obvious to anyone who is debating in good faith.

And you, personally, don't need to answer for anything. Well, depends really, but it's not something I'm interested in exploring at present time.

Throughout this thread you have been trying to interject your own, very localized and limited personal experience and pass it off as some kind of authoritative argument about a lasting nation-wide event. You've tried to dismiss these riots as a nothingburger, you've tried to claim the ideology that is plainly supporting it is not actually doing so.

I will not accept all that, period. Find legitimate arguments to make or GTFO.

 

[GoldRanger]

@ShadowArxxy I will add that if you want to just discuss the left/right divide, without trying to argue that the riots are nothing/not left wing/justified which they overwhelmingly clearly aren't, are and aren't respectively, I'm in. If you prefer to keep dying on this hill, that's also your choice to make.

 

[Rocinante]

This is completely irrelevant. The riots could be 0.01% of the whole, as long as they cause tremendous damage and loss of life (be forewarned that I will not accept any attempt to minimize that, given the video evidence we have), and BLM's, the media's and the Democrst's unconditional support of them (Biden's milquetoast token "condemnation" of "bothsides" doesn't count), the rioters are the left and the left are the rioters.



Yes, it is. I still maintain that as a single person that can be in a single place at a single time, your eyewitness account is unreliable and not worth considering.



See above.



You are nobody. Nobody cares about you or your condemnation.

The media (CNN, ABC, MSNBC, others) has been covering for the violent rioters, first calling them a "white supremacist provocation" (for which, until this very day, there is no evidence), then switching the narrative to "the riots are justified". All throughout they have tried to downplay and minimize them, like you're doing right now.

I will repeat that it doesn't matter if the rioters are 5%, 1% or 0.01% of the protesters, what matters is the damage they cause, and the reaction the elicit from the larger organizations on the left. Trump has certainly got plenty of shit over the tiny sliver of genuine white supremacists that support him. The left should be judged by the same standards.

Only very recently have the media started making, small, reluctant concessions to the notion that the riots are indeed real, people indeed care about them, and they are indeed without justification. Not until polls have shown that the public is overwhelmingly opposed to them, and supporting them makes the Dems look bad.

The Democratic party has been donating to bail out rioters.

DAs in blue districts have refused to prosecute rioters, even when there's clear video evidence. No explanation is given to the public.

The rioters are extremely well organized. This is no "raw outburst of emotion". Brick pallets are distributed through their route hours beforehand, as recorded in pictures, video and witness accounts. They always come prepared with shields, gas masks and other protective equipment. Unedited video recordings of a Bernie Sanders primary campaign senior staff member has predicted these riots months before they actually occurred, implying coordination and premeditation.

I didn't hear of BLM condemning them. I did hear their overwhelming support for them.

NY Black Lives Matter leader speaks on protests, riots after returning from Minneapolis

ALBANY NY (WRGB) - The death of George Floyd has created a rift between police and the community. Across the country, members of the Black Lives Matter movement are speaking out and taking peaceful action in the wake of Floyd’s death. The president of the local black lives matter movement in New...

cbs6albany.com

This same Newsome called riots "The language of the unheard" in February, before the protests started, by the way. Riots, explicitly, not protests.

Black Lives Matter organizer calls Chicago looting ‘reparation’

A Chicago Black Lives Matter organizer defended the widespread weekend looting in the heart of the Windy City — as “reparation.” “I don’t care if somebody decides to loot a Gucci’s or a Macy’s or a…

nypost.com

Black Lives Matter on Chicago Looting: Black Lives ‘More Important Than Downtown Corporations'

Members of the Black Lives Matter Chicago chapter issued a statement Monday on the looting and unrest that erupted in the city following what police said was misinformation regarding a police-involved shooting. The group, which also held a solidarity rally on Monday night for those arrested...

www.nbcchicago.com

Etc. etc. A couple of milquetoast condemnations months after this started will not suffice. The organization should be screaming the condemnations from every rooftop, on the front of their website, in every interview. And heads should roll over this. People have been shot dead in the street because of them FFS.

And we haven't even touched upon the open Marxism and black supremacism of this vile organization.



It's starting to look like Roci and Bacle were right about you being a gaslighter. I'm getting annoyed at your attempts at victimhood narrative, honestly. Poor, poor misunderstood ShadowArxxy. Listen, when we say "the left", we don't mean "100% of individuals that hold a singular left-wing belief in the observable universe". We mean left-wing dominated institutions and organizations. Which should be obvious to anyone who is debating in good faith.

And you, personally, don't need to answer for anything. Well, depends really, but it's not something I'm interested in exploring at present time.

Throughout this thread you have been trying to interject your own, very localized and limited personal experience and pass it off as some kind of authoritative argument about a lasting nation-wide event. You've tried to dismiss these riots as a nothingburger, you've tried to claim the ideology that is plainly supporting it is not actually doing so.

I will not accept all that, period. Find legitimate arguments to make or GTFO.

Yeah. Told you. I'm not even going to waste my time with this one anymore now that I know who it really is.

It might be a personal attack, and I accept responsibility for that...but having dealt with this person for 14 years, she blew any benefit of the doubt I might give her YEARS ago. As you can now plainly see, she is not and will not argue in good faith.

She operates on lies and manipulation. It's on full display right here in this thread, so we can disregard the last 14 years, but yes, prior experience does poison my attitude towards her.

 

[Xilizhra]

Wasn't someone saying a while back that this place was better than Spacebattles because you didn't have the same dogpiling/condemnation for alleged bad faith debating? Because this looks exactly like Spacebattles.

Anyway, one area where I think we might be able to come to an agreement: I'm willing to concede that familial stability/multi-parent households are significantly more important than the left often gives it credit for, if you're willing to concede that it doesn't have to be a man/woman set of parents.

 

[Rocinante]

Wasn't someone saying a while back that this place was better than Spacebattles because you didn't have the same dogpiling/condemnation for alleged bad faith debating? Because this looks exactly like Spacebattles.

Anyway, one area where I think we might be able to come to an agreement: I'm willing to concede that familial stability/multi-parent households are significantly more important than the left often gives it credit for, if you're willing to concede that it doesn't have to be a man/woman set of parents.

I admit I carried a grudge over from SB for a specific person, but I will not say more as the staff seems revealing their identity to be doxing.

This person has repeatedly burned any sense of good faith I have in them over the last 14 years and I'll leave it at that.

I'd have given them a wash and a clean slate, but this thread demonstrated that they're the same person doing the same shit they've always done. They have poisoned the well.

 

[GoldRanger]

Wasn't someone saying a while back that this place was better than Spacebattles because you didn't have the same dogpiling/condemnation for alleged bad faith debating? Because this looks exactly like Spacebattles.

Anyway, one area where I think we might be able to come to an agreement: I'm willing to concede that familial stability/multi-parent households are significantly more important than the left often gives it credit for, if you're willing to concede that it doesn't have to be a man/woman set of parents.

We first need to establish what stances each side even holds. I, personally, am all for LGBT marriage. Not sure how well I represent the Republicans on this issue though. The right and center hold many differing opinions on various things.

 

[Rocinante]

We first need to establish what stances each side even holds. I, personally, am all for LGBT marriage. Not sure how well I represent the Republicans on this issue though. The right and center hold many differing opinions on various things.

I lean right but that's mostly because the left has shot so far left rather than me moving right. I hold many socially liberal/libertarian views which I have always held.

I am pro choice, (to an extent, I don't mind making the cut-off time much earlier,) and pro lgbt marriage, and pro trans/non-binary lifestyle, as long as you are not hurting anyone else and leaving children out of it. It's your life, and your body, and you're free to do with it as you wish. I do not personally believe that you can change gender. It's a cosmetic change, but I'll respect your male or female chosen pronouns. I draw the line at made up pronouns. No Xe, xir, or improper and confusing use of "they." Male or female. Pick one and I'll use it.

Pro-gay is probably my most liberal view, as several of my close friends, and my best friend I have ever had, ever, are gay, and I think it would be reprehensible to tell them they can't marry or be with who they love. Part of what has allowed me to come over to the right wing side of things, is that they have widened their tent and mostly given up on that fight, which is an overwhelmingly positive move in my opinion.

 

[LordsFire]

I think that any form of promiscuity, heterosexual or homosexual, is unethical. I also am not going to hate somebody for falling to that temptation. Lord knows I struggle with lustful thoughts myself.

I like to use anger as a comparison. Just because you feel lust, does not mean you should act on it, in the same way that just because you feel anger, does not mean you should act on it. If it isn't right for you to lash out thoughtlessly in anger, why is it right for you to act thoughtlessly in lust?

Anger, carefully restrained, can be useful. Lust, carefully restrained, can be part of a fulfilling relationship.

Neither should be let run willy-nilly, it's destructive, and provably so.

All of this said, I'm not going to try to create laws to say you can't do something between consenting adults. Neither am I going to let other people force me to act like extra-marital sex and sex within marriage are the same thing.

 

[Rocinante]

I think that any form of promiscuity, heterosexual or homosexual, is unethical. I also am not going to hate somebody for falling to that temptation. Lord knows I struggle with lustful thoughts myself.

I like to use anger as a comparison. Just because you feel lust, does not mean you should act on it, in the same way that just because you feel anger, does not mean you should act on it. If it isn't right for you to lash out thoughtlessly in anger, why is it right for you to act thoughtlessly in lust?

Anger, carefully restrained, can be useful. Lust, carefully restrained, can be part of a fulfilling relationship.

Neither should be let run willy-nilly, it's destructive, and provably so.

All of this said, I'm not going to try to create laws to say you can't do something between consenting adults. Neither am I going to let other people force me to act like extra-marital sex and sex within marriage are the same thing.

Your libertarian-like response to things you disagree with, is why I hold you in high regard and respect your opinions as much as I do.

Live and let live. That's my philosophy, too. If it neither picks my pocket or breaks my leg, it's of no concern to me.

People should live how they like. And also accept consequences for their actions if it leads to personal misery.

 

[Terthna]

Wasn't someone saying a while back that this place was better than Spacebattles because you didn't have the same dogpiling/condemnation for alleged bad faith debating? Because this looks exactly like Spacebattles.

Not really; I mean, at least here that sort of behavior isn't sanctioned and encouraged by the staff, and you're not punished for attempting to defend yourself.