(07-03-2023, 12:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You're running into European perception problems here. What you just described is a clear violation of the 1sr Amendment.
Oh wow, I want to expand on this a little bit. I can not see at all why this is a first amendment issue. I did not advocate throwing anyone in jail for stating an opinion or having a religion. What I was getting at is that flat earthers can not come to school and demand their kid is not taught about the earth being round. Am I wrong on that front? Can a holocaust denier demand his kid is not taught that it was real? Can a Christian demand his kid is taught the Bible instead of actual history, or that slavery was a positive or whatever it is they believe?
And that leads to sex ed too, at some point at least, leaving appropriate age aside for now. If someone wants his 15-year-old, sexually matured child to still believe that the stork brings the children and sexual desires mean shame and eternal hellfire then it seems to be quite appropriate to tell this child that this is BS, or else there's possible disaster looming.
(07-03-2023, 12:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: But then who decides what's in the child's best interests? Parents are legally and financially responsible for their children. You better have a rock solid reason for intruding on their autonomy when it comes to their children.
Well, I don't know how rock solid this is, but despite these responsibilities children are certainly not their parents' property and so their autonomy is certainly not an absolute one. Eg you can homeschool them, but you can not decide to not school them at all. A child's right to be educated superseeds parents that for whatever reason don't deem that necessary.
And extending that, parents don't have the right to determine the curriculum. God knows which parents have an issue with what [edited some examples out for they repeat themselves and it's more or less the same point from above]
As to who determines best interest, that is a bit technical. I'd say some mixture of teachers/school, external guidelines made by people who have expertise, and parents would probably be best.
(07-03-2023, 12:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I have no issue with children receiving age appropriate lessons on the effects of puberty and I doubt many others do either.
I'm no so sure about that honestly. Parts of the evangelical portion of US population, imho, is quite extreme at times when it comes to these things. Another point of contention is that your being in favor of age appropriate lessons could still just as well be met with all the counter-arguments you made before. Parents' autonomy and all. You might end up arguing for the same mechanisms of ultimately superseeding them if need be, you just pick a different time to do so, the time that you define as "age appropriate". Pretty much the same as I do, it seems we actually rather disagree on what age appropriate means more than anything.
(07-03-2023, 12:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The fact that this is even a major topic of discussion now, when it hasn't been for decades, kind of illustrates that it has gone too far. You've had instance of parents reading books from the school library out loud at school board meetings that got them cut off as the board complained they were "too graphic". Here's just one example.
Oh sure, it always goes too far, that is the major problem always in the end. I did not want to make a claim that it isn't so. Like every other issue this one is split in two perspectives and both turn increasingly extreme and uncompromising, as if to provoce the other side as much as possible. Liberals get way too liberal, conservatives get way too reactionary, peak outrage is reached and that is America, where people hate on each other over transgenders in bathrooms or baking cakes for gay people or sex ed or anything really. And so in sex ed debates most people, and I don't mean you, but I also consider patty an honest actor, the children are just pawns in this everlasting hate game and that's how I feel. That's why you can show me these videos from outrage porn sites like FOX (not a shot at you, I get that this is just where the video is hosted) and liberals can show me a whole lot of outrageous media pieces from their outrage porn sites as well. Imho that is the biggest problem here and everywhere, that both sides rather provoce and go too far and argue in rage and do not even want to attempt to reach any kind of compromise, and pretty much everyone is infected by that, at times including you. But since I hereby made a both sides do it argument, I guess it's time to take a break again.
(07-03-2023, 01:19 PM)hollodero Wrote: Oh wow, I want to expand on this a little bit. I can not see at all why this is a first amendment issue. I did not advocate throwing anyone in jail for stating an opinion or having a religion. What I was getting at is that flat earthers can not come to school and demand their kid is not taught about the earth being round. Am I wrong on that front? Can a holocaust denier demand his kid is not taught that it was real? Can a Christian demand his kid is taught the Bible instead of actual history, or that slavery was a positive or whatever it is they believe?
I misinterpreted your initial point, as it came in two parts. No those people absolutely could not demand that their kids not be taught those subjects. But, they could absolutely teach their children their own beliefs at home without fear of government repercussions. That would be covered by the 1st Amendment.
Quote:And that leads to sex ed too, at some point at least, leaving appropriate age aside for now. If someone wants his 15-year-old, sexually matured child to still believe that the stork brings the children and sexual desires mean shame and eternal hellfire then it seems to be quite appropriate to tell this child that this is BS, or else there's possible disaster looming.
You could, but you're fighting powerful forces at home. The parent has had the kid around them the entire life of that child. The school gets them 5-6 hours a day for around 60% of the year, or less.
Quote:Well, I don't know how rock solid this is, but despite these responsibilities children are certainly not their parents' property and so their autonomy is certainly not an absolute one. Eg you can homeschool them, but you can not decide to not school them at all. A child's right to be educated superseeds parents that for whatever reason don't deem that necessary.
I honestly don't know the law in this regard, but in many ways a child is the property of their parent. But I don't disagree with your second point.
Quote:And extending that, parents don't have the right to determine the curriculum. God knows which parents have an issue with what [edited some examples out for they repeat themselves and it's more or less the same point from above]
It depends. A lot of parents, of all ethnicities, have issues with DEI/CRT style curriculum for various reasons. These aren't hard scientific facts, they're social sciences.
Quote:As to who determines best interest, that is a bit technical. I'd say some mixture of teachers/school, external guidelines made by people who have expertise, and parents would probably be best.
With a sensitive subject like sex the line gets a bit blurred. There should be parental involvement as we've discussed, if only to decide the level of their child's participation.
Quote:I'm no so sure about that honestly. Parts of the evangelical portion of US population, imho, is quite extreme at times when it comes to these things. Another point of contention is that your being in favor of age appropriate lessons could still just as well be met with all the counter-arguments you made before. Parents' autonomy and all. You might end up arguing for the same mechanisms of ultimately superseeding them if need be, you just pick a different time to do so, the time that you define as "age appropriate". Pretty much the same as I do, it seems we actually rather disagree on what age appropriate means more than anything.
You're always going to get hard line outlier types. That's not what we're seeing now. We're seeing a very different thing here. It's a ground swell of parental anger on this issue, and it's not confined to hard right people, by any means. The Glendale incident of late, in a deep blue area, is further proof of this.
Quote:Oh sure, it always goes too far, that is the major problem always in the end. I did not want to make a claim that it isn't so. Like every other issue this one is split in two perspectives and both turn increasingly extreme and uncompromising, as if to provoce the other side as much as possible. Liberals get way too liberal, conservatives get way too reactionary, peak outrage is reached and that is America, where people hate on each other over transgenders in bathrooms or baking cakes for gay people or sex ed or anything really. And so in sex ed debates most people, and I don't mean you, but I also consider patty an honest actor, the children are just pawns in this everlasting hate game and that's how I feel. That's why you can show me these videos from outrage porn sites like FOX (not a shot at you, I get that this is just where the video is hosted) and liberals can show me a whole lot of outrageous media pieces from their outrage porn sites as well. Imho that is the biggest problem here and everywhere, that both sides rather provoce and go too far and argue in rage and do not even want to attempt to reach any kind of compromise, and pretty much everyone is infected by that, at times including you. But since I hereby made a both sides do it argument, I guess it's time to take a break again.
Fake outrage is absolutely in bed with real outrage at this point. My main point would be to reiterate that this is far from a evangelical and far right issue at this point.
(07-03-2023, 06:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: But, they could absolutely teach their children their own beliefs at home without fear of government repercussions. That would be covered by the 1st Amendment.
(07-03-2023, 06:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You could, but you're fighting powerful forces at home. The parent has had the kid around them the entire life of that child. The school gets them 5-6 hours a day for around 60% of the year, or less.
(07-03-2023, 06:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It depends. A lot of parents, of all ethnicities, have issues with DEI/CRT style curriculum for various reasons. These aren't hard scientific facts, they're social sciences.
(07-03-2023, 06:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: With a sensitive subject like sex the line gets a bit blurred. There should be parental involvement as we've discussed, if only to decide the level of their child's participation.
Can't disagree with any of that. Also, none of it alters my perspective on the question at hand.
(07-03-2023, 06:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You're always going to get hard line outlier types. That's not what we're seeing now. We're seeing a very different thing here. It's a ground swell of parental anger on this issue, and it's not confined to hard right people, by any means. The Glendale incident of late, in a deep blue area, is further proof of this.
(07-03-2023, 06:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Fake outrage is absolutely in bed with real outrage at this point. My main point would be to reiterate that this is far from a evangelical and far right issue at this point.
I was not trying to argue, in fact I tried to actively avoid that impression, that it is all just fake outrage. Eg. I guess there is quite some deliberate provocation in play too, as there usually is. What I would say is that there is also a prong of fake outrage involved, grounded in some of the popular culture war tropes so many forces thrive on. Which is what makes the debate about this and most other topics so difficult, that this outrage culture already took hold of it. But I am sorry to have put this aspect here, one that is not all that specific and to me would work in almost any other thread as well.
(07-04-2023, 11:24 AM)hollodero Wrote: Can't disagree with any of that. Also, none of it alters my perspective on the question at hand.
I was not trying to argue, in fact I tried to actively avoid that impression, that it is all just fake outrage. Eg. I guess there is quite some deliberate provocation in play too, as there usually is. What I would say is that there is also a prong of fake outrage involved, grounded in some of the popular culture war tropes so many forces thrive on. Which is what makes the debate about this and most other topics so difficult, that this outrage culture already took hold of it. But I am sorry to have put this aspect here, one that is not all that specific and to me would work in almost any other thread as well.
When it comes to sex education the right is dead set against it for fear it will lead to promiscuity vs all the studies that show educating children leads to safer sex and actually reduces teenage sexual activity.
In general there is a trope that the left hates guns and violence and the right hates sex and nudity...especially in pop culture buy also in the way the two sides approach their public platforms.
Many on the left want stricter gun laws and agree with public nudity being allowed.
Many on the right want to ban all pornography (as they define it) but encourage permit less or open carry.
Personally I'd rather have my kids see a naked person in public than have to worry about them getting in the middle of shootout.
But I also feel citizens have a right to both.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(07-04-2023, 11:53 AM)GMDino Wrote: When it comes to sex education the right is dead set against it for fear it will lead to promiscuity vs all the studies that show educating children leads to safer sex and actually reduces teenage sexual activity.
With you on the issue, but I think it would help if there weren't indeed quite some cases of people taking it too far and large portions of the left being somewhat unwilling to address that. Eg that sex ed should not take it further than necessary. The video shown before is indeed one examples of many where imho it would help to alleviate some fears within the more reasonable portion of the right if more reasonable people would admit that yeah, this is indeed too much and we need to be sensitive about that.
(07-04-2023, 11:53 AM)GMDino Wrote: In general there is a trope that the left hates guns and violence and the right hates sex and nudity...especially in pop culture buy also in the way the two sides approach their public platforms.
First, I have to say that this, possibly unintentionally, is shaped to spark outrage by some. Some that will say that the right does not like violence as well and that you were trying to imply otherwise. It's just the world you live in.
When it comes to the tropes, this is just a small sample size of all the tropes going around. The right are also called bigots, mostly either racists or ignoring racism to a point where they are just as bad as racists, uneducated, stupid, gullible and then some. The left are called crazy, Venezuela-loving socialists, unworldly, insufferably woke and then some. Then some being the key. Both of course are also called hypocrites and completely beholden to their respective media outrage machines. Clichés that are met at times, but are applied, directly or indirectly, all the time, to the detriment of every discussion and every possible compromise.
(07-04-2023, 12:18 PM)hollodero Wrote: With you on the issue, but I think it would help if there weren't indeed quite some cases of people taking it too far and large portions of the left being somewhat unwilling to address that. Eg that sex ed should not take it further than necessary. The video shown before is indeed one examples of many where imho it would help to alleviate some fears within the more reasonable portion of the right if more reasonable people would admit that yeah, this is indeed too much and we need to be sensitive about that.
First, I have to say that this, possibly unintentionally, is shaped to spark outrage by some. Some that will say that the right does not like violence as well and that you were trying to imply otherwise. It's just the world you live in.
When it comes to the tropes, this is just a small sample size of all the tropes going around. The right are also called bigots, mostly either racists or ignoring racism to a point where they are just as bad as racists, uneducated, stupid, gullible and then some. The left are called crazy, Venezuela-loving socialists, unworldly, insufferably woke and then some. Then some being the key. Both of course are also called hypocrites and completely beholden to their respective media outrage machines. Clichés that are met at times, but are applied, directly or indirectly, all the time, to the detriment of every discussion and every possible compromise.
And that's why I said "in general". It is part of the culture wars that national and local politics are involved in right now. And it ebbs and flows with time.
Go back to the 90's and you find me arguing vehemently with Tipper Gore and the Democrats about labeling albums and against the right about the "Satanic Panic", which oddly were intertwined with each other.
But right now it is the right/conservatives/Christians leading the way on the evils of sex and, strangely, history when it comes to what children are being taught. At least the leaders of their party. Therefore they will bear the brunt of the criticism until that changes.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
Well, hopefully, the children at least didn't see any naked people while they were being shouted at by masked Nazi's with guns.
VIDEO THREAD: Today, avowed Neo-Nazi group "Blood Tribe" rallied with rifles and swastika flags outside an LGBT "Pride in the Park" event in Watertown, Wisconsin.
"Us or the pedophiles!" they chanted at the crowd, which included children. "There will be blood, blood blood!"… pic.twitter.com/DBtntCGerG
"We are very proud and stand up for right is RIGHT! "
"Don't tell anyone who we are...."
6. As Blood Tribe tried to leave, they paused, apparently irritated at press behind them. One approached with an AK rifle that he chambered a round in moments earlier and asked if we were "trying to dox us."
"If you keep following me man -" he said before smacking his rifle.
Meanwhile, in Florida, a detective warned suspected pedophiles so they could avoid being arrested:
A Florida detective was arrested for warning 5 people they were targets in a "child sex sting." He was a member of the "crimes against children unit" & is now facing 15 felony charges. pic.twitter.com/UcbFPXcj4W
(07-30-2023, 11:37 AM)GMDino Wrote: Well, hopefully, the children at least didn't see any naked people while they were being shouted at by masked Nazi's with guns.
VIDEO THREAD: Today, avowed Neo-Nazi group "Blood Tribe" rallied with rifles and swastika flags outside an LGBT "Pride in the Park" event in Watertown, Wisconsin.
"Us or the pedophiles!" they chanted at the crowd, which included children. "There will be blood, blood blood!"… pic.twitter.com/DBtntCGerG
"We are very proud and stand up for right is RIGHT! "
"Don't tell anyone who we are...."
6. As Blood Tribe tried to leave, they paused, apparently irritated at press behind them. One approached with an AK rifle that he chambered a round in moments earlier and asked if we were "trying to dox us."
"If you keep following me man -" he said before smacking his rifle.
(07-30-2023, 11:43 AM)GMDino Wrote: Meanwhile, in Florida, a detective warned suspected pedophiles so they could avoid being arrested:
A Florida detective was arrested for warning 5 people they were targets in a "child sex sting." He was a member of the "crimes against children unit" & is now facing 15 felony charges. pic.twitter.com/UcbFPXcj4W
It's always interesting to see radicals conflate two things as if caring about one makes you not care about another. You can be opposed to children being exposed to sexually inappropriate materials and topics and also be fervently against pedophiles. Regardless of said pedophiles sexual orientation. Your post is disingenuous in its attempts to paint people who care about the former as not caring about the latter.
(07-30-2023, 12:58 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Those dues are glowing.
It's always interesting to see radicals conflate two things as if caring about one makes you not care about another. You can be opposed to children being exposed to sexually inappropriate materials and topics and also be fervently against pedophiles. Regardless of said pedophiles sexual orientation. Your post is disingenuous in its attempts to paint people who care about the former as not caring about the latter.
Glowing?
Anyway...two separate posts about two separate things.
One, Nazis opposing Pride. Which is horrible and presented as a challenge to those who though seeing naked people was bad. And perhaps a suggestion that those people are siding with the wrong people when it comes to gay rights and trans people.
One CAN hate both. But one can also be careful of the company they keep.
And the other story is about an actual detective helping pedophiles. Yes, I made the assumption there were no drag queens assisted but that is based on statistics less than the story itself. And if Florida of all places! The bastion of rightwing ideology and freedom.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
Anyway...two separate posts about two separate things.
One, Nazis opposing Pride. Which is horrible and presented as a challenge to those who though seeing naked people was bad. And perhaps a suggestion that those people are siding with the wrong people when it comes to gay rights and trans people.
One CAN hate both. But one can also be careful of the company they keep.
No, absolutely no. Your attempts to interlink people opposed to children being exposed to sexualized material and actual Nazi's (if those guys are even real, which I doubt) is pathetic. If you can't argue your point without trying to equate concerned parents with Nazis then you've shown that your hand is very weak. It's like saying that people who believe in a nuclear family are bad because ISIS believes in a nuclear family. Again, it's a pathetic attempt to paint all people opposed to your viewpoint as being allied with awful people.
Quote:And the other story is about an actual detective helping pedophiles. Yes, I made the assumption there were no drag queens assisted but that is based on statistics less than the story itself. And if Florida of all places! The bastion of rightwing ideology and freedom.
Wait, you mean a bad person did a bad thing?!?!?! Well that never happens so this incident is really a feather in the cap of your argument. Again, you cannot argue your case on its actual merits so you have to try and smear your ideological opponents as being awful people or being in bed with awful people. It really shows you have zero faith in the actual merits of your position that you're reduced to such obviously underhanded and slimy tactics. Oh, it's also disingenuous.
A separate post responding to GM's underhanded tactics. I have worked child molestation cases where the offender is straight. I have worked child molestation cases where the offender is gay. You have never seen me try and equate gay with pedophilia due to the actions of these individuals, and you never will. Why, because it's obscene to equate the actions of one person as representative of a whole group, especially when said group has no ideological bent in that regard.
(07-30-2023, 01:41 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, absolutely no. Your attempts to interlink people opposed to children being exposed to sexualized material and actual Nazi's (if those guys are even real, which I doubt) is pathetic. If you can't argue your point without trying to equate concerned parents with Nazis then you've shown that your hand is very weak. It's like saying that people who believe in a nuclear family are bad because ISIS believes in a nuclear family. Again, it's a pathetic attempt to paint all people opposed to your viewpoint as being allied with awful people.
Wait, you mean a bad person did a bad thing?!?!?! Well that never happens so this incident is really a feather in the cap of your argument. Again, you cannot argue your case on its actual merits so you have to try and smear your ideological opponents as being awful people or being in bed with awful people. It really shows you have zero faith in the actual merits of your position that you're reduced to such obviously underhanded and slimy tactics. Oh, it's also disingenuous.
Could be I just think Nazi's shouting "there will be blood" at families and children is worse that them seeing a naked person and all I said, in response to you, was be careful of the company you keep. Does it mean if you hate gay people or trans people or cross-dressers you are a Nazi? Of course not. Anyone with any sense and no agenda knows that. It means your views are shared with Nazis and maybe you should look at why.
And yes a person did a bad thing. That's why I shared it in a thread about drag queens "coming for your children". It wasn't a drag queen that did the "Bad thing".
As to you follow up: Exactly. I agree.
Pedophilia and homosexuality have nothing in common. You have a gay brother and I'm sure lots of gay friends so you know personally.
Nor does being a drag queen who reads at a library or a lesbian who is naked in a fountain.
But this thread was also about them trying to make your children gay/trans...at least according to the OP.
Most pedophiles, those "coming for your children" are males:
In fact it is more likely one of the Nazis is a child molester than the people they were threatening. But we didn't have a thread about that so I posted it here.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(07-30-2023, 01:57 PM)GMDino Wrote: Could be I just think Nazi's shouting "there will be blood" at families and children is worse that them seeing a naked person and all I said, in response to you, was be careful of the company you keep. Does it mean if you hate gay people or trans people or cross-dressers you are a Nazi? Of course not. Anyone with any sense and no agenda knows that. It means your views are shared with Nazis and maybe you should look at why.
And yes a person did a bad thing. That's why I shared it in a thread about drag queens "coming for your children". It wasn't a drag queen that did the "Bad thing".
As to you follow up: Exactly. I agree.
Pedophilia and homosexuality have nothing in common. You have a gay brother and I'm sure lots of gay friends so you know personally.
Nor does being a drag queen who reads at a library or a lesbian who is naked in a fountain.
But this thread was also about them trying to make your children gay/trans...at least according to the OP.
Most pedophiles, those "coming for your children" are males:
In fact it is more likely one of the Nazis is a child molester than the people they were threatening. But we didn't have a thread about that so I posted it here.
The issue here is you're trying to paint anyone who disagrees with you on this issue as willingly allied with Nazis. This is as false as it is underhanded and you're doing it intentionally. Trying to tie your opponents to awful people is a common smear tactic for radicals and I'll call it out every time I see it regardless of who's doing it. So your options are twofold. Either apologize for your attempts to equate concerned parents with Nazis or keep doubling down. Either way you'll be revealing a lot about your character.
(07-30-2023, 02:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The issue here is you're trying to paint anyone who disagrees with you on this issue as willingly allied with Nazis. This is as false as it is underhanded and you're doing it intentionally. Trying to tie your opponents to awful people is a common smear tactic for radicals and I'll call it out every time I see it regardless of who's doing it. So your options are twofold. Either apologize for your attempts to equate concerned parents with Nazis or keep doubling down. Either way you'll be revealing a lot about your character.
I chose option three: Ignore you attempts at bating and trying to misrepresent what I've said when I explained it clearly.
Kindly get back to the topics of the thread vs making the topic me.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(07-30-2023, 01:44 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A separate post responding to GM's underhanded tactics. I have worked child molestation cases where the offender is straight. I have worked child molestation cases where the offender is gay. You have never seen me try and equate gay with pedophilia due to the actions of these individuals, and you never will. Why, because it's obscene to equate the actions of one person as representative of a whole group, especially when said group has no ideological bent in that regard.
Calling someone or a group a pedophile or pedophiles or groomers is just an easy and effective way to throw the ultimate suspicion and shade on them. Years ago my cousin married a unpleasant woman with untreated borderline personality disorder and she'd fight with everyone and her main strategy to get people to back off or just stop contacting my cousin (which was her goal) was to accuse them of being pedophiles or warning you that she would tell people you are a pedophile or call the police and say it.
It was effective. We knew and she knew that people aren't likely to brush that off or "side with" the accused when it is that extreme. And if 9 people don't believe her and 1 person does, well it's going to be unpleasant for you.
So we had tickets to a Pirates game and we got one for my cousin and she was one of those "You can't leave the house because every second I can't see you, you are cheating on me" types, and her response was to tell my cousin she'd download CP on his computer and call the police if he left. She also called the police at times and said she saw us "driving drunk" and stuff like that.
Anyways, it's just the most effective attack because damn near no one wants to be the one who "sides with" the accused. It's just weird seeing the strategies this insane and cruel woman used to bully my cousin and isolate him from his friends and family being used by one of the two major political parties.
(07-30-2023, 02:56 PM)GMDino Wrote: I chose option three: Ignore you attempts at bating and trying to misrepresent what I've said when I explained it clearly.
Kindly get back to the topics of the thread vs making the topic me.
So you're saying you're not equating parents concerned with their children to Nazis when you literally posted this in this very thread;
(07-30-2023, 01:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: One, Nazis opposing Pride. Which is horrible and presented as a challenge to those who though seeing naked people was bad. And perhaps a suggestion that those people are siding with the wrong people when it comes to gay rights and trans people.
You're literally saying here that if you're concerned about children being exposed to sexually inappropriate material that you are allied with Nazis. Like I correctly, and frequently, point out about you, disingenuous. Do you like freeways and think the interstate highway system is a good idea? Oooo, you're on the same side as the Nazis!!! Also, kindly don't try and play the "back to the topic" card, you're the one that opened this discussion up by comparing parents to Nazis. If the far left couldn't label people who oppose them as racists, Nazis or bigots they'd have nothing left with which to respond.
(07-30-2023, 03:24 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Calling someone or a group a pedophile or pedophiles or groomers is just an easy and effective way to throw the ultimate suspicion and shade on them. Years ago my cousin married a unpleasant woman with untreated borderline personality disorder and she'd fight with everyone and her main strategy to get people to back off or just stop contacting my cousin (which was her goal) was to accuse them of being pedophiles or warning you that she would tell people you are a pedophile or call the police and say it.
It was effective. We knew and she knew that people aren't likely to brush that off or "side with" the accused when it is that extreme. And if 9 people don't believe her and 1 person does, well it's going to be unpleasant for you.
So we had tickets to a Pirates game and we got one for my cousin and she was one of those "You can't leave the house because every second I can't see you, you are cheating on me" types, and her response was to tell my cousin she'd download CP on his computer and call the police if he left. She also called the police at times and said she saw us "driving drunk" and stuff like that.
Anyways, it's just the most effective attack because damn near no one wants to be the one who "sides with" the accused. It's just weird seeing the strategies this insane and cruel woman used to bully my cousin and isolate him from his friends and family being used by one of the two major political parties.
I agree, except the tactic is being used by both parties, just with different groups. The right likes to hurl the pedophile accusation and the left, as exemplified in this very thread, like to hurl the Nazi or fascist allegation. They're both wrong, and they're both highly charged and serious allegations and I'm assuming we agree on that. It's too bad that some in this thread do not.
(07-30-2023, 02:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The issue here is you're trying to paint anyone who disagrees with you on this issue as willingly allied with Nazis. This is as false as it is underhanded and you're doing it intentionally. Trying to tie your opponents to awful people is a common smear tactic for radicals and I'll call it out every time I see it regardless of who's doing it. So your options are twofold. Either apologize for your attempts to equate concerned parents with Nazis or keep doubling down. Either way you'll be revealing a lot about your character.
(07-30-2023, 02:56 PM)GMDino Wrote: I chose option three: Ignore you attempts at bating and trying to misrepresent what I've said when I explained it clearly.
Kindly get back to the topics of the thread vs making the topic me.
Do as I say, not as I do.
-The only bengals fan that has never set foot in Cincinnati 1-15-22
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
