Should Gay people be privileged?

Author: Benjamin ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 89
  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin

    Wath this 2 minute long video and you will be shocked.

    "Gay people should be protected" - strange man in military uniform
  • Theweakeredge
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Debates: 24
    Forum posts: 2,764
    4
    6
    10
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Theweakeredge
    --> @Benjamin
    Their rights should be protected same as anybody else. "Privileged" as in having more rights than other people, no, but since they are targeted more (like a denomination that literally wants state mandated executions of gay people) they should have a bit more protection. Just like if someone was being targeted by criminals and people knew, that person would get more protection. I'm not even arguing for more rights or anything like that, just an awareness that its not complete in the paradign shift of people being okay with gay people. Aka, some people still think they should not be gay
  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin
    I agree. 
    But Gay people do not need protection from war, they are still tough humans.
    Also, how do you know that gay people are being targeted?
  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin
    --> @Theweakeredge
    You see, one cannot acomplish utopia. And one cannot build a society on contradictory philosophies.

    Society were as stable and peacefull as possible during the Christian dominion.
    Christianity brough about human rights, the "regranting" of freedoms, democracy and capitalism.
    But even such a "perfect" philosophy: people have inherent values given by God,

    has some flaws:
    • Focus on religion
    • Objective morality exists, with which one cannot disagree

    As I said, utopia is unachieveable.
    Why? Amongst other reasons because philosophy always pays a price:
    • Objective morality cost religious education and or legal enforcement
    • Freedom of speech costs minorities their comfort, like Gays
    • People might be prejudiced if they have another philosophy

    As we know, society today is far worse (with regards to happiness and stability) than ever before.
    Can one claim politicians? No, they are the result of politics, the result of philosophies.
    And the philosophy that created the first "democratic" civilisation was Christianity, good democracies are almost exclusively former Christian countries.

    Yes, many flaws have been present, but society was not ripped apart and constantly in conflict as it is today.
    Why is society (in the west) returning to unstability, inner conflict and almost civil war? 
    Because the old philosophy has returned: paganism
    What has it brought us:
    • Freedom to break christian morality
    • Conflict because of this
    • Freedom to use the goverment to surpress the old and tested philosophy that is the Judeo/Christian values

    The sex revolution cannot bring neither peace nor stability, only satisfaction for certain groups of people.
    And those groups obviously did not exist while the old philosophy ruled.

    So since a country cannot be based on both, we must accept the concequences:
    • One philosphy must stand alone
    • Neither groups should be protected nor oppressed by the government

    Gay people were not oppressed in the past, they did not know what the concept of "gay" means.
    But today, both "gay"s and "moralists" feel oppressed by society, while the government is pulled in a tug of war between them.


    This is not a fact, this is history.
  • oromagi
    oromagi avatar
    Debates: 99
    Forum posts: 4,628
    7
    9
    11
    oromagi avatar
    oromagi
    --> @Benjamin

    Wath this 2 minute long video and you will be shocked.

    "Gay people should be protected" - strange man in military uniform
    The Onion is a satirical news source.  This a joke video from 12 years ago.

  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin
    Tooooooooooooooooooo sad
  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin
    Im apparently spreading true shocking news that are neither shocking, news nor true.
  • oromagi
    oromagi avatar
    Debates: 99
    Forum posts: 4,628
    7
    9
    11
    oromagi avatar
    oromagi
    --> @Benjamin
    As we know, society today is far worse (with regards to happiness and stability) than ever before.
    false

    Gay people were not oppressed in the past, they did not know what the concept of "gay" means.
    false
  • Theweakeredge
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Debates: 24
    Forum posts: 2,764
    4
    6
    10
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Theweakeredge
    --> @Benjamin
    You are factually incorrect, the time whenever the churches had the most power was literally called the dark ages, you wanna know what the age where people turned away from your rhetoric was called? The enlightenment. "Objective morality" you claim, yet you don't understand that if what god's typically spew is "morality" then I want nothing to do with morality. I could care less about having that label and more about people. I could care less about what you think I am mandated to do by some unproven god, and more concerned about how I can help other people. 

    Another thing, humanity is not at it's worst, where the hell did you get that idea from? Humanity is in the best spot its ever been in, less people are impoverished, less people are starving, less people are in slavery, crime per population is going down, scientific innovation is at its highest rate it has ever been, people are actually getting happier on average, now - the entire "stability" point is more subjective note that is different in different areas of the globe. My point though, is that no, humans are not at their "worst" you are just incorrect factually. You know when we were at our worst though? Whenever people dismissed scientific achievement, whenever they were hung at stake for disagreeing with what the bible said, whenever anybody who wasn't straight was burned, whenever people had to hide in fear because of religious persecution, and not just of atheists or gay people, but of other religions! 

    Saying the "sex revolution" or "rejection of judeo ideas" caused "unstability" is a claim and you must demonstrate your position. We were unstable before either thing became true, do you want to know what the actual chart says? That whenever we get fascist presidents, the country gets divided. Gay people aren't making things worse as you seem to think, in fact, in a lot of places - religiousity has a positive correlation with a lack of happiness, whereas secular countries have a correlation with happiness. Stability? You can look to the dude who said he would ignore the election if it didn't favor him, Trump, and has now gone on to pathetically beg senators to recount votes. what an interesting strategy. We know the cause of the unstability, and it sure isn't what you claim it to be. Now I want a straight answer, why can't there be more than one philosophy to rule a nation, because history shows that nations that are to ultranationalistic or reliant on one way of thinking go down. Another question, where the hell did you get utopia from? I never even mentioned a utopia. By the way, some people super duper deserve to be oppressed, and by oppressed, I mean put in jail. Like the literal Nazis. And some people should be protected, like muslims, from religious prosecution. 

     Honestly, everything you say is a biased assertion, you don't even have real syllogisms.... 
  • Conway
    Conway avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 226
    0
    2
    5
    Conway avatar
    Conway
    --> @Benjamin
    The sex revolution cannot bring neither peace nor stability, only satisfaction for certain groups of people.
    Rich people are more sheltered from the consequences of detaching the unitive nature of sex from procreative responsibility. 

    And those groups obviously did not exist while the old philosophy ruled.
    Then where did the "new philosophy" come from?

  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin
    --> @Theweakeredge
    You are correct when reffering to the world.
    Why is the world becomming a better place?
    1. Capitalism - Created by christianity https://www.acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-10-number-3/how-christianity-created-capitalism
    2. Human rights - Created by the Christian countries of Europe and the west
    3. Science - based on the belief that humans can and should explore the universe - a belief held by christians
    4. The ideology of democracy - it only works well in Christian and former chritian countries
    The world is becoming more and more secular. And secular means: the western philosophy (christianity) without the religion.


    Your statement:
    You are factually incorrect, the time whenever the churches had the most power was literally called the dark ages,
    You mean the time when the church was a secular state authority? The time when they persecuted anyone that read a bible in their native language? The time where they made deciccions that contradicted any possible interpretation of the bible by putting power in the hands of a corrupt religious leader? 

    That is not how Christianity works, thats how pagan religions ruled, having a dictator as religious leader. The church was not biblical, but rather political.

    The time of the enlightenment, the time when the bible was allowed, the time when christian and secular philosophers alike were allowed, the time when everything was perfectly fine, like the french revolution happened, the time when the church started to burn witches by following the old pagan traditions.

    Are you aware of the fact that the roman church ended the practise where children could be killed by their parrents (after birth), they took care of the sick, they created the first universities, they tried to keep wars from happening between christian coutries(before the reformation) and during their time some basic scientific methods were developed. Remember, europe had been barbaric before the roman empire, and the church was way better at keeping "modern" morality  enforced than any pagan religion. The good things that started during the "dark ages", were most often a result of the christian world view , rather than a random guy from the future "liberating" people from the church.
    NO OTHER RELIGION was more succesfull than christianity at handling a society. The bad things about the church, were things they adapted from pagan religions, not something they invented (except for sexual morality, but come on, there were no reason to believe that anyone claimed to be gay at that time)

    You said it yourself:
    By the way, some people super duper deserve to be oppressed, and by oppressed, I mean put in jail.
    Why the Nazzies, not the Jews?

    Because the Nazzies want others to be oppressed?

    Should you be oppresed then? What about me?

    You see, every group of people "deserve" to be oppressed, so no groups should be oppressed.

    Also, Hittles hated God, his people the Jews and also his word the Bible, because they stood in stark contrast to his ideology.
    And you make a major mistake:
    And some people should be protected, like muslims, from religious prosecution. 
    Why? When was the last mosque shooting? There is no reason to protect a specific group of people.
    General anti terrorism is important though, but some muslim might disagree with that claim.


     Honestly, everything you say is a biased assertion, you don't even have real syllogisms.... 
    Biased? Yes!
    Assertion? Yes, that does not mean it does not contain fact and logic!
    Without syllogism? Yes, you did so as well, when it comes to history and society, we do not need syllogism in a forum.

    We do not need pure logic, we can discuss by thinking.

  • Theweakeredge
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Debates: 24
    Forum posts: 2,764
    4
    6
    10
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Theweakeredge
    --> @Benjamin
    Whenever you make an assertion you have the necessary burden to demonstrate that claim true, otherwise that assertion is nothing more than that... an assertion. 

    You are ignoring what your religion does I see - Human rights? Don't make me laugh, they were the ones hanging people for disagreeing! If Christians created human rights I guess Rome created democracy. You are correct that the protestant reformation was a reason for the development of capitilism, alongside the cloth trade and industry, both of which were despised by the catholic church (the majority of christians at the time), so, again - to say that "Christianity" created capitilism would be incorrect. Do you know what other belief that is held by christians? That the world was flat, that we live in a dome, that earth is in the center of the universe, that people who thought otherwise literally be hunted down and killed. For every advance of a Christian scientist there was the rest of religion slowing down the achievement of religion. Most times the hellenists would be the religious that actually encouraged science, which is hilarious based on your bias against pagans.

    The world is becoming more and more secular, and better and better, now I'm not saying there is necessarily a causation, but there is at the very least a correlation between secular-ness and the world becoming better. Thanks to your doctrine you believe the world to be getting worse, but that isn't true whatsoever. "A secular power" Ha! The power was run by "god's chosen" there was nothing secular about it. If you fell outside of the doctrine of the bible you were hanged, also..... do you mean that the roman empire which is typically marked as the beggining of the "middle" or "dark" ages? [1] That literally doesn't work there dude, your mixing up the times, trying to find any reason whatsoever that religion isn't evil, that it hasn't caused irreparable damage to the world at large. 99% of the assertions you make aren't even supported, you are falsely giving the credit of these things to the religion because the people who made or discovered these things happened to be christian... why? Because the people with the most resources were in christian countries, because they stole them from all the other countries, because they trampled them. In fact, a good percentage of the people who made these advancements were persecuted by the church for doing what they did! That wasn't the work of the church! That was the work of brilliant people, most of whom, only believed in christianity, because for a good amount of time if you didn't you'd be socially ostracized. If not hung. Also... no other religion was as good as christians at handling society? Tell me please why other religion own countries then? 

    Also what the actual fuck? Are you just completely void of any logical consistency? The reason we oppress the Nazis and put them in jail is become they are ideologically focused on killing non-araians.... .me wanting them to not kill Jews doesn't mean that I deserve to be oppressed, it meas that I give a shit about people, unlike you, who seem to have no problem with the Nazis except for them "Not loving god".... the Catholic church will get back to you on that one, eh? Because muslims are oppressed and specifically targeted by people, and that's pretty unconstitutional. Not only that, but I long try to give religious freeedom, unlike you, I don't believe in theocracy. Unlike you, I want a government that doesn't love an unprovable sky daddy more than it loves its own citizens. I don't want the bible or any holy book enforced as law, because that would be a shit society. Take it how the more secular a government is, the better they are at not being corrupted, not saying a secular governement isn't corruptable, they are, as all humans are, but they are less so. Everything you claim in response isn't even a rebuttal, you don't even respond to most of my arguments, you only respond to things that you strip all context from. You try to frame it like I made certain claims and don't even rebut to those strawmen correctly! Everything about your style suggests posture and poise, no actual logic.
  • Theweakeredge
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Debates: 24
    Forum posts: 2,764
    4
    6
    10
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Theweakeredge
    --> @Benjamin
    Gay people were not oppressed in the past, they did not know what the concept of "gay" means.
    I didn't even see that line, the rest of your BS was so bad I couldn't even see it hidden in there. You are so wrong, you have no idea what your talking about
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 10,306
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Conway
    "How many soldiers' lives is the life of one gay man worth?"

     "Seven."

  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin
    Comically enough it is that you also did only come with assertions.

    I just want to point out you made no comment whatsoever to any of my actual facts.

    Also, the correlation between better-ness and secularism is the opposite. Rich people tend to trust their wealth, not God.
    Christianity created Europe, Europe made everything the world loves today, Europe became rich and Europe left God.

    I do not believe we should base our nations on religion, but the underlying philosophy of Christianity has been so positive, that there is almost no similarities between a secular person and a Christian when it comes to nonreligious matters - secularism adopted the Christian values, just as the world did the human rights.


    Tell me, what are the richest, most free, least oppressive, most scientifically advanced and most insistent on following the human rights?
    The middle east? India? Asia, Afrika? Anywhere without a Christian presence or influence?
    No!
    It was Europe and the countries where Europeans settled. This is a basic fact, and no rhetoric of yours can unsettle this.

    Now, should we be racist like they were while conquering the globe? Are Europeans better than all other people? 
    NO OF COURSE NOT!!!

    What was the difference then? Colonialism? Every continent had its own empires all of the time!

    The difference was these beliefs:
    • All men are created equal and with certain inalienable rights
    • In the eyes of God, "There is no difference between slave or free, man or woman, greek or jew, they are all equal" as Paul claimed
    • The universe is not a spirit, god, supernatural, unknowable, irrational, determined or a soul. The universe is ours to administrate and explore


    You are bullying me for no reason:
    it meas that I give a shit about people, unlike you, who seem to have no problem with the Nazis except for them "Not loving god"
    I used it to show that the worst ideology in history was created by a hater, not lover, of God.

    Who also hated God and religion? Stalin, Mao and co (co as in communism)


    You are misinterpreting my arguments.
    I never claimed that the Bible should be the law, you are confusing "stability" with "absolute"

    My argument is not that the moral specifically presented in the Bible should be chosen. 
    I claim that we should make an objective moral code, and not change it every single opportunity we get.
    People get mad when morality is changed, they riot, they engage in activities to stop the rapid changes, this destroys stability, and is bad even from the perspective of someone that did not have any moral code.


    Also, why are you attacking the church?
    Listen, it might be hard to realise it, but NOBODY in the dark ages had a "good" or "not suppressive" regime.
    Tell me about a single part of the world were gay people were not "oppressed", were people could live better lives than in oppressive Europe.
    Life was awful, but the church was the first entity in history know to be a constant force that enforced "morality" (though I admit their morality is far inferior to the one we have in the present, post-catholic west)


    Tell me, WHO actually created human rights?

    I know you are not going to answer any of my questions, just throw a bunch of accusations at me.
    STOP
    I genuinely want to know the truth, and trash-talking me wont help you convert me to the light side of the force
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 10,306
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Benjamin
    Christianity created Europe.

    Protestants created America.


    They didn't trust papal authority or the Virginia company.
  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin
    True.
    And from America came everything we love today.

    Christianity created the West, and now the West is rejecting Christianity, effectively erasing its own foundations.

    At least, before you remove religion, have SOMETHING to replace it, so that society does not spiral down into chaos.
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 10,306
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Benjamin
    have SOMETHING to replace it.

    We have Scientology. Trust the Science god.
  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin
    Science is based on the philosophy:
    • We are rational beings
    • We have accurate information about the world
    • The world is comprehensible and intelligently made so that other intelligent beings can understand it
    • The world will not retaliate, it is not holy, nor dangerous
    • The world is predictable
    • etc
    All of which are based on Christianity.


    "Faith - strong belief in unproven claims" is necesary.

    Science denies the existence of anything religious, supernatural or immaterial, even the mind.

    But atoms are not objective, just concepts within our minds, thus making science collapse with the removal of the mind.

    Its a paradox: 
    • Science denies the mind
    • The mind supports science
    Only a blind faith or religious belief can support both at once.

  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 10,306
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Benjamin
    SOMETHING to replace it...

    The god gene is in our DNA...a vestigial throwback to when Darwinism naturally selected our hunter/gatherer genes to have a sense of hierarchy and herd instincts.

    Technology has made all those vestigial instincts pointless, as we can now satisfy our instinctual herd mentality with smartphones and our sense of hierarchy with CGI celebrities.

    Darwinism demands a great culling of the human gene pool to have the species match the world of technology. Whether it takes one thousand or ten thousand years, it is inevitable that the "god gene" will become a relic of the DNA only found in fossilized humans one day.


    Survival of the fittest will be the DNA that can thrive in a world of technology better than any other human. It's inevitable.
  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin
    Humans that are better at surviving will be selected.
    Currently, all humans survive or live in a place were not all humans survive.

    Technology will make sure that all humans survive, making it our own choice of how we want to evolve.

    I suggest we make us force-sensitive, very force-sensitive.
    Imagina a Jedy that not only had a walkie talkie but a smartphone, he would be unstoppable. He could bring pictures of evidence, thus ensuring that he is taken seriously.
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 10,306
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Benjamin
    Medical enhancements can't drive natural selection though. People that have biological difficulty adapting to the technological environment will choose self-annihilation over time, whether it is from a drug overdose, suicide, or tribal warfare. And the people who work best with technology are inevitably going to win that war for their progeny. Not everyone has the genes to "learn to code" and the ones that do it the best are the ones that have a future.

    It's the end of the god gene as we knew it.
  • Benjamin
    Benjamin avatar
    Debates: 19
    Forum posts: 447
    2
    3
    9
    Benjamin avatar
    Benjamin
    Medicine ensures everyone survives.
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 10,306
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Benjamin

    Medicine can't cure people afflicted with useless vestigial DNA. At least not yet.

    One day we can engineer our DNA to speed up what would take natural selection thousands of years. Until then, we can just watch people naturally destroy themselves as they have no purpose to live in a world of technology.

    Whether it takes one thousand or ten thousand years, it is inevitable that the "god gene" will ultimately become a relic of the DNA only found in fossilized humans one day.
  • Theweakeredge
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Debates: 24
    Forum posts: 2,764
    4
    6
    10
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Theweakeredge
    --> @Benjamin
    You claim that I am missing your arguments while missing my own, I am not saying that at the time there was a better player, I simply correcting your assumption that the church is some kind of saint (ironic I know), its not, never has been. Ironically the less it follows the original code the better it gets, why is that? Why is it that the modern day church is so far away from its roots? 

    All of your notions are false, the correlations speak of the less religious something is the more happy it is [1], I spoke on facts you are making assumptions, that science made America, wrong - the rejection of the British Monarchy (An actual nation created by religious principles) and monarchy (like theocracy). You assume that the religious made science yet don't respond to my argument that the people who discover things are persecuted [2]. You claim that every state that is advanced and literate is because of the former christian correlation, do you deny that before that was the hellenist? Before that was the paganist? Why are you soley attributing that success to one religious influence, everywhere has had several! Do you forget the invasion of all of Africa between WW1 and 2? They were after that heavily influenced by christians. Do you forget that Christians had colonies everywhere forcefully industrailizing it for their own gain and the native's loss. After that, of course their was christian influence! Where is the evidence that the Christians are the cause of that though! Several princples of holy books seem to undermine science, advance, liberty, even rights of the people. It supports theocracy and the tearing down of democracy, to not trust yourself, do you forget that whenever people became something great they were inspired by individualist? 

    I disagree that a objective morality could ever exist, and to say otherwise is to be intellectually dishonest, for me. I'm not saying that people believing that objective morality are dishonest, most of them geniunely believe there is, but I do not believe there is, so any of that claiming it to for me would be dishonest from my position. I don't seek to "trashtalk you" I want you to see the clear contradictions in what you're saying, I want you to understand that what you see as some kind of goal, is my hell on earth. Morals don't change "everytime we want them to" we simply learn that some things are terrible, some things are social constructs, etc, etc. I don't disagree that we should have core values or principles for stability, but to make them absolute (as something objective would) would be the enemy of liberty. Your insistence that Secular morality inherited Theistic notions is born of ignorance, at least on the type of secular morality that I speak of, humanism, for example - is most definitely not influenced by christian principles, not to mention the bible isn't even the orginator of what good ideas it does has! That would typically be eastern writers and philosophers. Take the golden rule for example, that was definitely from the bible or any other western religious influence [3].  Funnily enough Thomas Paine, the write of Common Sense was the ones to write the line of inalienable rights and he is typically seen as motivated by enlightenment values and the political nature of democracies versus monarchies [4]. Even more hilariously, the enlightenment is also colloquially known as the "death of god" in religious circles [5]. You are wrong in almost every sense of the word.

    Science and philosophy were first coming up by great thinkers like Socrates and co, in that era of time.... in a society of democracy and religious freedom, also.... very hellenistic. So actually I would assert that everything you say to be because of christian or western religion is the result of hellenism. And you don't believe in Zeus do you? Now, if I was rude I apologize, but I don't think your points have any real substance to them.