zedvictor4

Who's not good at logic?

I am Caucasian by definition, but sweat freely.  Does that make me a racist?

Though, am I racist because I am not Korean.

No.

Racism is about unreasonably discriminating on the basis of perceivable difference, and not about ones particular propensity to perspire.

Everyone discriminates internally but not everyone allows their internal judgements to manifest externally.

For sure, there is currently a whole lot of malicious PC racism going on....But that's largely  based upon the possibility of a cash reward.....Fraud.

Interestingly my wife sweats very little....So does that suggest that she is Korean?

"Gay" is an established social construct, relative to a specific recreational sex methodology.

There is no such thing as a "Gay gene" per se....Maybe a genetic coding that might affect a conscious choice to perform a particular recreational sex act.

Though there is certainly a whole lot of social nurturing going on too....If you make a sex act socially acceptable then more people will give it a go and probably enjoy the experience.....After all, enjoyment is the secondary purpose of recreational sex.

Nonetheless.

If I chose to only have recreational sex with sheep, would I therefore be able to justify my actions  by  saying that I  possessed a Baaaa gene, and had no choice?

And just to make Theweakerone's hair curl......Why do we not attribute paedophiles with a Kiddy gene?.....Perhaps they have no choice either.

If you're going to be absolutely PC non-discriminatory, then it's got to be SLGBTPQ.

Why just a "Gay gene"?

In fact, can any choice action that seemingly strays from a social norm be justified by a no choice gene?

So Doc......How are 4 year old dodgy buses, the fault of the DNC?

That would be like me blaming the Conservative Party for my dodgy washing machine.

Unrefreshingly, is this just turning into another futile dig at the Democrats?

I did have my suspicions  Doc.

A formal debating contest is something that I don't have time for.

But I'm happy to discuss.

So, to confirm divinity you must first  prove an actual GOD, rather than a hypothetical GOD.

A formal debate will not prove an actual GOD, but only compare the literary abilities and level of knowledge relative to a subject.

To date, the highest levels of knowledge and literary skill have only ever managed to elucidate an elaborate, supernatural hypothesis, and never been able to prove an actual GOD.

But feel free to have a go.

So what is divinity other than the concepts and consequent faith of men?

Some things that you say are stupid.

And some things that you say  are more stupid than others.

Sin is make believe really.

A bit like hypothetical GODS.

@RatMan

Words of wisdom.

Buses.

A refreshing change from religion and politics Doc.

Electric bus systems have been successfully in operation for decades, admittedly with an external power supply.

So probably the build and battery quality as oromagi points out, and not the viability of the concept.

Should have sourced quality engineering from abroad.......Like what we do Doc.

True.

If we ever get to such a point, "too many people" would  be defined by unsustainability.

It's there  in 18 words.

Why  say in a 1000 words, what can be said in 18.

So prove that it is a GODS will and not just the will of men.

NB. All literature is  written by humans...So it's no good whatsoever, quoting from old or reinterpreted literature.

@Theweakeredge

A hot headed answer and wrong in every regard. Your information regarding sexuality might be spot on PC, but the PC agenda seeks to overlook the reality of the issue in order to justify an action...... And as far as I am concerned an action that doesn't need justifying.

If you read my response dispassionately you would see that I was agreeing  that "biological impulses are noncontrollable".....FLRW was  stating the obvious.

Though the question was about choice and not about brain function per se, and choice is about making a conscious decision, and conscious decisions by definition are controllable.

Fundamentally, the noncontrollable impulse is telling the organism to procreate, and procreational sex has but one natural modus operandi.

Therefore to adopt any other course of action is to choose not to procreate, but to choose between a wide variety of other recreational options.

The outcome of any action will nonetheless be the same....Temporary satisfaction of the urge to reproduce.

What else might affect one's impulses and consequent choices, is not relevant to the question.

Overriding natural impulses and indulging in "Gay" recreational sex, although seemingly preferential is still undeniably a choice. Other options are available.

All that said....What ever method of recreational sex you might might find preferential and therefore choose to adopt is absolutely fine by me, and does not require PC justification.

Just as your childish choice to block me, is absolutely fine too.

As far as we are able to know, "trash" is an assumption based upon an alternative point of view.

Well, if they are killed we will know that their suspicions were correct.

Though now the story is out, it might be just a crank acting upon fake news.

Shit!

So why should there not be post vax breakthrough clusters?

Probably true, that perception does stimulate a specific mediodorsal thalamus response.

If you think about it, everything relative to function relies upon perception stimulating brain activity stimulating function. Is there any other option?

So one could apply  the same argument to a hundred and one other, different contradictory attitudes.

For instance, why am appalled at the thought of eating witchetty grubs.....This is obviously an acquired response, stimulated by brain activity.....Nonetheless I still have the choice available.

And  the OP is about choice, and choice is deciding between two or more options.

In terms of recreational sex there are multifarious options.

In terms of procreational sex there is only one option....Though one can choose not to partake in such activities.

And "Gay"  and all it's associated social paraphernalia, is a social construct, relative to a particular penchant for recreational homosexual activity.

Well stated.

Is it Allah's will that people should not be free to choose.

No, it's the will of men.

A virus doesn't float about looking for unvaccinated targets.

We might all have the same opportunities available.

But we do not all possess the same ability to utilise such opportunities.

Oppression has occurred throughout history, and is far from a white and black thing.

Cherry picking one specific era of oppression relative to skin tone, simply to extract a financial reward. Is to say the least a tad cynical.

At worst, somewhat racist.

To the last point....Good point....Think about it, and apply it to the whole issue of recreational sex.....Even straight.

Though "ashamed" is perhaps an inappropriate word.

There is procreational and recreational sex.

You can choose to partake in either, and recreationally you can choose whatever modus operandi  you prefer.......No problem.

Male, female copulation and fertilization, defined by their physical attributes, is straight....How straight do you require it?

The same persons can enjoy whatever mode of recreational sex they choose, doesn't make their capabilities any less straight.

LGBTQ.... No matter how you dress it up, is a social construct relative to the taboo subject of recreational sex and the justification thereof.

Notwithstanding physiological anomalies..... Every male or female is born with either male or female reproductive organs.....That is one definition of straight.

How one chooses to satisfy corresponding urges recreationally is another issue....Straight in this context simply defines one modus operandi.

Have you ever considered why these contentious discussions only ever consider LGBTQ and not SLGBTQ?

Of course they do.

The brain decides relative to it's programming.

Whether that be physiological or psychological.

Recreational sex is just a way of satiating the singular male or female urge to reproduce......Attraction is an irrelevance in this context.

The whole partner, relationship, mortgage and puppy thing is just a socially contrived system of accepted behaviour.

When have you ever known the Globe to agree on anything.

Nope, the only real solution is a catastrophic event.

Discrimination is an unavoidable, internal data management process.

How different is Joe Biden to any other 78 year old American Caucasian?

Yet you choose to discriminate here on Debateart.

As I stated previously.

There's procreational sex.

And then there's multifarious recreational sex.

One can choose to do indulge in either, both or none.

LGBGTQ etc is just socially constructed mumbo jumbo.

Masturbation or variations upon an intercourse theme....Same drive, same end result....Roll over and go to sleep.....Till the next time.

Your body will tell you when and you will choose how.

Because there isn't.

What depth of skin tone defines black?

And most reasonably fit people can run.

But who can eat the most pies?

The law of political correctness, says that it is unfair to call superior pies eaters, fat bastards.

Just saying.

Nice stats.

Everyone discriminates Bonesy.

I keep telling you.

You discriminate against Joe Biden for starters, as well as 101 other things probably.

Data in, data assessment, reach a conclusion....It's an unavoidable process.

Racism has a tendency to be just a media inspired super-discrimination relative to a perceivable difference in skin tone....Not specifically about race at all.

Human Race......What other race is there?

Martian Race.....Little Green Bastards.

The modification of sound waves and the variable appreciation thereof...A strange phenomena indeed.

Lemming reasons nicely.

It's a phenomena know as auto-suggestion.

See seizure, will have seizure.

Sort of Voodoo.

Superiority, might be defined by success or longevity or strength or speed.

Or who can eat the most burgers in ten minutes.

The Christian GOD  is an imperfect hypothesis.....Human failure to understand, based upon a lack of information.

So based upon themselves,  they created an imaginary magical  floaty about bloke, and a myriad of whacky tales.

Of course, this is what people had been doing for millennia Stephen, all over the World.

Absolutely nothing new in absurd and imperfect religions.

So, what isn't art?

Or more precisely, what cannot be art?

Don't forget the Russians.

Americans have a tendency to forget the Russians when they talk about victory in Europe.

And I'm not sure that beastiality featured in Russian thinking....They were probably happy with raping German women....And eating the chimpanzees...Not that there were many chimps to be found in Europe at the time.....Cat soup maybe.

There are a multitude of reasons why one person might flourish and another not so.

But just because one person displays a lighter skin tone, doesn't automatically make them the reason.

We're all new human organisms today, different data conditioning, different outlook, different motivation.

You can't  blame me for something that happened 200  or more years ago to someone that no one alive  today ever knew.

Take a look at Africa today....A certain percentage of the population flourish whilst others sit around in their tin huts going nowhere.....The hierarchy of inherited ability.

In fact, this always has been a global phenomena. And certainly not just a dark skinned thing....And certainly not my fault.

Yep...Always my line.

Everyone discriminates internally.

Learning to not discriminate externally is the best we can do.

That is to say, respond to everyone in the same way, even though we perceive them differently.

Gap-sentence link maybe.

Can you explain the link between WW2 and Chimpophilia.

Art is a business, for those that promote themselves as professional artists,  and those that promote professional artists.

Marketing is key....Selling the useless to the gullible.

Nonetheless a shrewd investor can make a lot of dosh by doing so....So not so useless for some.

And Excuse the pun, but reading up on  Duchamp and his  fountain I came to the conclusion that Duchamp was actually taking the piss out of the Art Establishment.

A GOD principle might  be perfect if can be achieved.

But all GOD ideas remain hypothetical.

So hypothetically perfect Doc.

Though unlikely to be the picture book GOD as seen in illustrated Christian bibles.

I certainly agree with the substitute children and expiring egg thing.

CRT is a critical racists theory.

Birth...Life...Death.

I think that the life bit is going to get a whole lot tougher, for a whole lot of people.

Especially if we keep producing them quicker than we get rid of them.

Evolution/material evolution and associated aspiration is the culprit, not capitalism per se.

Though capitalism might influence the rate of material evolution....But that's debateable.

It's basically paying people for what was considered a norm at the time.

And sets a precedent for judging all past events by current standards.

In a few years time people will be wanting reparations for the environmental damage caused by the industrial revolution.

And LGBTQ's will have a field day.

Perhaps I could even get some reparations for the enslavement of Britons during the the Roman  or Viking conquests.

No chance, comparative skin colour not provocative enough.

The reality is that all past events shaped all present events.

So if the current situation is so wrong and unbearable, perhaps all  Afro-Caribbean's should return to Africa.

But I guess that they actually quite like it there.

Nope, it really is just about trendy present day racial discrimination for money.

True.

To explain the existence of LGBTQ one needs to study sociology at university.

Leaving it to Miss in the biology lesson is a waste of valuable school time.

And the teaching of morals is a subliminal thing that variously pervades, various societies and various sub-groups.

And I knew all about sex and contraception, long before Miss embarrassed herself in biology.....Relevant data transfer started way before that.

And my Dad bless him, just smiled knowingly.

@RatMan

And Debateart doesn't mean  having to agree with everything that the RatMan says......That would be Dictateart.

In order to elicit a response, one sometimes needs to provoke.

And if every response was trolling, everyone would be a troll.

And you are easily provoked and easily responded to.

Which is the nature of you and I.

A positive position defined by interpretation can also be a negative position defined by interpretation, and vice versa.

It all depends upon the individual making the distinction.