Lemming

It's 'not about being 'Muslim, so much as one's time and place.

Would you say 'modern British persons are a bunch of colonizers, conquerors, enslavers?

I don't know much about the Middle East, so I've little to say on their situation,

But I find it likely that were someone raised a Muslim, their outlook, actions, would vary, from country to country, that they were raised in.

I'm sure Muslims in the Middle East, have varied, from time period to time period.

All I have to be is even 'slightly familiar with human history, and you will find Christians and Jews who have committed terrorism or slaughter.

I do not mean this as a condemnation of 'anyone, but that individuals ought see themselves and history clearly.

Groups and individuals vary, from time and place.

Teachings vary, from time and place.

Least, such is 'my opinion.

The Christian Bible varies as well,

Three well known Abrahamic religions,

Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

Share a number of similarities, I'd assume.

Unless you give evidence, such as a memo, meeting, or directive.

I see little reason for myself to think corporations are trying to turn anyone gay.

I'm unfamiliar with Islam, so I'm unsure of what I offer, 'but,

As for open or closed groups,

Depends on the time, place,

Individuals and groups, Christian, Atheist, Islamic.

Not calling 'anyone a jerk, just illustrating point by video,

Even though I 'could just explain it, I think video is funny,

And really only need first 44 seconds.

Better answers can occur 'after a conversation.

Out of curiosity, what's your opinion on public nudity?

Personally, I thought it was obvious that there existed feasible reasons the questions could not be answered, 'other than,

The FBI attempted to overthrow the government for Trump.

Or,

The FBI attempted a false overthrow of the government, so Trump would lose support.

My hope was the thread would just disappear, if no one addressed it.

. . .

Though that's not to say the FBI could 'never be involved, or it's not something to worry about,

But Cruz questions certainly aren't proof of 'anything to me, 'or the way one would go about it.

@RationalMadman

Personally, I think your actions, intentionally and/or unintentionally, bring about many of these situations.

But even if that, still wouldn't change my opinion of 'their actions.

That we each think each other's opinions on this subject to be wrong, is clear enough by our opinions stated.

Personally, I would have been fine with them locking it.

@Topic

I'd suppose a society might end up having more or less homosexual individuals, due to the following reasons,

(1) More or Less Established norms, reason for which varies.

(2) More or Less of the opposite sex, as might occur in prisons, armies, war, or a country with a one child policy yet individuals want children of one sex more than another.

(3) Change of culture, whether due to current population new ideas, changes in current ideas, new immigrants' ideas effecting country, young population new ideas, changes in current ideas.

(4) Genetics, though I've never yet heard of a 'gay gene, I 'would believe that certain genetics might make a person presupposed.

(Addon)

I suppose some individuals might feel contempt for a nation of gay individuals, or a military of such.

But the 300 were renowned.

What would matter in the end is ability, merit.

Though I'll admit groups and societies often shun and mock what is different to whatever their current society is, make life harder for them.

Though such is not 'necessarily homosexuality, depending on society.

(Addon)

And I suppose there 'is evidence of corporations, groups, that attempt to influence society down paths they like.

But my view of it is less Illuminati, and more just standard human scheming, which one finds about life and society.

Fair points,

But for some reason, I'd prefer not to use such a method, myself.

If someone does something worth being addressed,

What matters is that someone did something worth being addressed,

Not whether one's own head can be buried in sand.

Though I think it's an interesting idea,

I'm not for it myself.

I 'do find it funny, how it encourages my brain to think of airmax1227 as 'literally his profile picture.

@RationalMadman

I think your advice is good,

Though it's for 'my shame, not theirs, that I avert my eyes.

And every time I am reminded that I am not following morality, as I was taught in Christianity.

I don't hope to reclaim that morality,

But that my heart hardens and forms in egoism, that I've come to prefer.

Perhaps in time I'll come to not even 'mind that shame of remembrance.

(Sometimes I think I'd prefer)

Still, if one is speaking of considering others, then I think your post is correct.

We expect law givers, law enforcers, to 'follow the rules.

We expect such of our fellow citizenry.

The 'greater 'good, is to keep to a society that has respect for rules.

If SupaDudz did not follow the rules, I'd have less reason to support him.

(Joke)

They will often not realize that, 'or not care.

I don't expect people to always understand what will bring harm or good.

@RationalMadman

Interesting when one can find small original artists.

I don't think I'd call giving a beggar money 'immoral, unless I went to 'extreme's of taking the 'best moral action in every case, which sounds too difficult for a human, to me.

I've given money to a begger at 'least once in my life, I'd 'suspect it's possible I've given money other times in life, whether to beggars or more normal people who just needed a bit for whatever reason, even if just to buy a soda at work or something.

But only one time in my life stands out, when I was a teenager, where I'd been walking home from the bank, after making a withdrawal, and got blindsided by some fellow, though more I just wasn't paying attention, I forget the particulars, except that I 'think I gave him a $20,

Made the guy rather emotional, in how touched he was, whether people don't usually give that much, or just that type of person, or it was an act.

But it still affected me,

I was still a Christian then, and it left me with an indescribable (Now) emotion, of. . Connectivity to other people, existence, a desire to do more, as well as guilt.

Which may sound a pretentious feeling,

But such is the type of Chri-

Never mind. Point is I've done it once.

The topic 'mostly comes to my mind, due to this topic.

Which may be meant a bit as a joke, bit serious,

But I'm not faulting anyone for their actions, just made me pensive.

For an 'individual, helped out to some cash,

It's a nice act I suppose.

But between giving a man a fish, and giving him a fishing pole,

The fishing pole 'seems better, to me.

But then, some people prefer the fish.

(Addon)

'Now in life, I 'would generally avoid giving money to other people, yes.

Though situation, or emotion 'might suddenly break my preference.

Maybe I think some people would use it better than others,

Maybe I'm embarrassed by being asked.

I'd 'rather just 'keep 'my money though.

I'd rather 'I just have a good time.

(I 'think)

Oh, Good for you.

In other places I've seen people 'lose their jobs, or endanger patient safety by 'not following the rules.

I think people ought say for themselves, if they have something to say.

I think too many of these posts are insults and attacks, that would be better off 'only in a roast if an individual 'requested a roast of themselves.

I think filters exist for a purpose, and that it's hardly 'wrong to be polite to others.

Moderating a debate website is 'hardly analogous to being a Nazi.

'Many jobs require that we take actions or follow policies we may not personally agree with.

But if SupaDudz job doesn't require throwing a live baby into an incinerator,

I'm not going to be much bothered by him following this websites rules.

@zedvictor4

I find it difficult to speak practically 'without using the words free will.

Though there is a point, a considerable number of individuals homeless possess mental illness, usually untreated (Assumption on my part)

Or they possess addictions, or considerable peer pressure in their peer groups if had.

I am 'doubtful that Shelter, food, comfort, hygiene and safety.

Are 'so available to beggers in society,

But perhaps I underestimate them, and society.

Though if you mean 'society 'has these items, Shelter, food, comfort, hygiene and safety.

I suppose,

But the question of whether we ought structure society with a 'far 'stronger safety net, is another topic.

Though likely one I'd agree strongly with,

'IF one was planning a new country or city.

Money is just a placeholder, a symbol, a representation.

Even if everyone were but brains hooked up to computers online,

Our interests, emotions, activities, efforts, would still be given value.

Even on an island with two individuals, a single 'word, would have value, a 'slight enunciation of kindness or hate.

We 'are.

Purpose and essential, 'depend on what one is speaking of.

@FLRW

True,

Difficult to know the truth of other people, their circumstances, choices and resources available to them, known or unknown.

My assumption though, is that many people begging are not wealthy.

I don't understand the question,

I'd imagine people calling to a deity, be it their's or their cultures, is common enough in history,

But that's just a blind assumption on my part.

@zedvictor4

Without money,

An individual often suffers,

Being not so often, as unconventional in outlook as Diogenes.

Money by its purchases can provide shelter, food, hygiene, comfort, safety.

I don't feel like being nihilistic this moment, so I'll speak practically,

Morality is what of we believe to be right and wrong.

An urgent feeling, instinct, habit born of repetition and belief.

We make up morality, because we're humans, wired that way, I'd suppose.

Many organisms 'don't possess much thought-out morality, I'd hazard,

But for humans, I imagine morality has seen evolution, in our biology.

I think we do morality because we 'must.

We 'think too much 'not to, I 'think.

@FLRW

I suppose one could make an argument that giving money is better than nothing, for particular individuals,

An action inspired by sympathy, offering comfort said individual chooses of their own free will to purchase with said money.

I think I've explained myself well enough,

And I think the most likely explanation to your not 'understanding,

Is that you're 'pretending to not understand.

It 'could be that I've not explained myself well enough,

But I think I have, so I decline to explain myself further.

?

That's your thread, and you posted in #4.

Eh, my post was more for acknowledging that he made arguments against blacks being prime slaves in Islam.

Or in my reading post #6

I don't know much of history in Africa or the Middle East, so I've not much to say.

I 'would argue a distinction between government and religion, though.

Though religion has often given laws,

Many times in history, one see's countries act 'not according to their religions laws,

Or twist them to suit their needs.

I'd also argue against religion being the same 'everywhere.

In both place and time, they see great variation.

Mm,

I see he makes claims that the status of an Islamic slave, is not the same as western chattel slavery, #8

'Does claim most slaves taken by Muslims were either Whites or Turks, but 'does acknowledge some conquests that resulted in black slaves. #8

Provides sources and argument, against Islam being for chattel slavery. #16

Makes argument against, your sources, and one of your examples. #20

Well, I don't think he argues that there were 'no black slaves,

Though he does make argument that slavery in Islam is different than western slavery.

And it 'is true I suppose, that much like forms of government, there are many forms of slavery, still I'm not a fan of slavery.

I think he has 'some points when he makes arguments against western policy, 'some, though not all, maybe not even a majority, but I just skimmed those parts.

Myself I would say no,

Though that there are exceptions.

To my mind the 'moral action, would be to attempt to get them out of that lifestyle,

But the average person is not willing to risk themselves, or their funds, in what they expect often a hopeless endeavor.

For which they are not qualified.

They expect many individuals to prefer said lifestyle, possess an addiction, or mental handicap that 'keeps them to it.

If one is not going to help them, you say, perhaps the 'next most moral act 'would be to give them the money,

But I'd argue giving them directions to a public service that will 'actually help them, or feed them, to be better.

Better than a prolongation of their current lifestyle.

Better to give the money to a charity, or 'work in such a charity oneself.

I've said, what I've said.

Ahhh bullll, Stephen.

You yourself have no debates on this site, and ought to understand that some people prefer conversation to formal debate.

Nor should you 'not be able to see the motivation underlying a person when they 'issue such a debate challenge.

But perhaps that's too much for myself to expect out of you,

After all, the blind partisanship I see in many anti-theists, is what I dislike so, about them.

Though admittedly there are anti-theists 'not so partisan, it's the noisy one's who so rarely admit a fault, that I meet more often, online.

Where'd he claim that?

Many stances society currently finds offensive, still have a 'reason for their existence, a rationality, a past, causation.

Though this is not to say they are the 'only stance people could have chosen, that we should or should not choose them now, or then.

Still, people find it easiest to caricature stances they disagree with,

Though admittedly, 'some caricatures exist in truth.

Out of curiosity, why do you focus on black people in particular?

When you say property, are you referring to personal property?

And/Or Private property?

I understand some people prefer formal debates.

He could have phrased it better, but I don't think he had ill intent towards 'you, so much as your manner of conducting your debates, as he perceived them.

I said 'I can understand how people might dislike formal debates,

Which was based on my 'own thoughts of how people in general might prefer not to formally debate themselves.

Of EtrnlVw, I don't know his opinion towards debates,

His post appeared to imply your challenges as a juvenile p***ing contest, towards 'proving one better than another by user votes on a debate,

'Rather than discussing the topic in the forums.

Still, even a person's opinion towards debates, doesn't stop one from reading them,

Or judging the quality of said debates.

It's possible to 'address an argument, while not acknowledging it's points, admitting fault in oneself.

So EtrnlVw claims you like to threaten people with debates, when you could talk to them instead.

States he doesn't care for that behavior,

And your response to threaten him with a debate and imply that he is a "pussy." - Bones, #16 If he doesn't accept.

I suppose I can understand you taking offense at your debates being called garbage,

But I don't think much of the way you handled it,

Or your #2, implying him of cowardice and stroking your own crow.

But eh, I've plenty of faulty moments in my life, including how I've handled this conversation, though you may not see your actions as faulty, yourself.

@Bones

Meh, some people don't like formal debates that much.

And I think he's a point, in formal debates people often try to win, and ignore their opponents arguments,

They're not 'conversations in learning, so much as contests.

But of course your d*** move response is to say,

@zedvictor4

Don't know, myself, EtrnlVw's reasons if self request, or mods reasons, if not.

@Topic

I think it depends on context.

Gross negligence or intentionally stoking a flame makes it a bit deserved for a company to be sued.

But internet 'is huge, 'lot to moderate, hazy lines at times, what's acceptable, or what's not.

I 'do bit like idea of users using platform to create their 'own construct that 'they are responsible for, 'not the company.

Someone who makes a 'tool, need not be 'too responsible for how the buyer, user, uses it.

@Ragnar

That's one harsh ad, poor Ruffles.

Of private websites, my first instinct is that websites have the right to regulate speech on their site, more or less.

Though depending on the site policy, I may or may not prefer to use it.

My second instinct, is the difficulty caused by how much online life is integrated into the modern experience.

@ILikePie5

Of Mesmer I don't know all the details, glancing at his profile, the reason for banning mentions racism and possible multi-profiles,

I am unsure of DARTS 'current stance on freedom of speech, looking back in time,

bsh1, Post #8, What words are now banned? (debateart.com)

you cannot use the n-word but you can debate "that Black Americans have lower average IQs than white Americans and at least a few of those IQ points can be attributed to genetics."

Perhaps the mods believed that Mesmer  went beyond argument, and engaged in hateful content, without knowing the particulars, I could not say.

@Wylted

I was in the Navy for five years, yes.

I think the freedom of speech given to us by our forefathers, is more nuanced than 'anything 'goes.

Freedom of Speech 'has limits, sees more and less use depending on the circumstances.

If I say I am unsure, it's because I'm 'thinking about it.

@Wylted post #11

I am unsure, and will say I think it depends on the circumstance.

@ILikePie5

That may be true, having not followed their activities and bans with close scrutiny, I could not say.

My blurred view on the situation though, is that they were not 'just,

I'd say I believe in limited and variable free speech, rather than unlimited.

I think the religious section is better off without BrotherDThomas, who I'm doubtful 'hasn't deserved a ban at times.

Nor am I surprised that Wylted, has been banned in the past, who I'm doubtful 'hasn't deserved a ban at times.

Though I am unsure if some of their posts have been 'intentional trollings, or social dysfunction and insanity.

Of Mesmer, I couldn't say, as I didn't really pay him much attention,

- Milgram experiment - Wikipedia