Claremont Institute: America is Dead, Long Live Real America

[Machismo]

Historical and cultural context is entirely lost on you. They didn't "ban" it. They kept it banned which was the norm for the majority of human history. Upholding a longstanding tradition instead of questioning it is the opposite of caring about it.

You said:

I want to go back to the days when people didn't give a shit about others' sexual preferences.

You then put that date back to at least the 1800's, when Sodomy laws were rampant.

So, they cares so fucking much... they banned it.

Exactly what year do you want to go back to?

No no no... banning it is the epitome of caring about it. It means you care so much, and you hate it so much, that you want to literally arrest people for doing it.

"WE want to show how much we don't care about your sexual preference, so we're going to fucking ban it."

-Literally Nobody, Fucking Ever-

[Felya]

Historical and cultural context is entirely lost on you. They didn't "ban" it. They kept it banned which was the norm for the majority of human history. Upholding a longstanding tradition instead of questioning it is the opposite of caring about it.

Who banned it in the first place?

[Machismo]

How did I jump to conclusions with you constantly posting "Enjoy voter suppression" every time as if I supported it?

You jumped to the conclusion that the other poster was talking about you, then you told him to go kill himself (via a long walk off a short pier).

Do you want the quote?

[Endus]

I want to go back to the days when people didn't give a shit about others' sexual preferences.

When exactly do you think that was?

Because I can pretty much guarantee that whatever time you're thinking was was brutally oppressive and violent towards anyone not heterosexual, to the degree that anyone with a different orientation did their damndest to keep it secret. Hell, it was literally against the law in many countries.

Edit: Oh, and before you try and equate "private" and "secret" again, that's a false equivalence. Heterosexual people flaunt their orientation publicly constantly. Every kiss between a couple in public. Every handholding as they walk down the street. Every marriage between a man and a woman. They even announce those in the newspapers. Heterosexual people have never been expected to keep their orientation a secret.

[Antipathy1018]

You jumped to the conclusion that the other poster was talking about you, then you told him to go kill himself (via a long walk off a short pier).

Do you want the quote?

You really need to put more context in your posts then. We were last talking about voting, how am I supposed to know you were talking about Shadowferal, I can not read minds over the ether of the internet.

Also I have all ready apologized to them.

Post content if you don't want to be misunderstood.

[Wilfire]

You said:



You then put that date back to at least the 1800's, when Sodomy laws were rampant.

So, they cares so fucking much... they banned it.

Exactly what year do you want to go back to?

No no no... banning it is the epitome of caring about it. It means you care so much, and you hate it so much, that you want to literally arrest people for doing it.

You put it at 1800, not me. You have zero clue which date I meant so don't put words in my mouth.

Keeping something banned != banning it.

In the distant past someone cared about it enough to ban it. Quite possibly because diseases are easily transmitted through anal contact. They didn't have condoms for safe sex and they probably didn't understand what a disease was so they thought it was divine punishment. So they banned it. It was banned until technological progress (= condoms) happened and it made sense to revise the cultural norms and mores.

Once again, keeping things as they are and not revising them is the opposite of caring. They knew that their ancestors thought that it was bad and banned it. They didn't have evidence to the contrary. So they kept things as they were. It's as apathetic as one can be about an issue.

Your problem is that you think that historically people were evil, heartless monsters. In reality they were doing things that made sense to them instead of actively making others suffer for teh lulz as you seem to think.

[Shadowferal]

Seems to me there's always this conflating of winning legal battles with winning general acceptance.

[Machismo]

You really need to put more context in your posts then. We were last talking about voting, how am I supposed to know you were talking about Shadowferal, I can not read minds over the ether of the internet.

Also I have all ready apologized to them.

Post content if you don't want to be misunderstood.

I literally quoted where you jumped to the conclusion, I replied to the comment.

Are you seriously pissed at me that you don't remember what you just typed?

Your. Quote. Was. The. Content.

[Edge-]

Having a law against a certain sex act vs. having parades promoting the said sex act, having laws protecting the said sex act from hate speech, having a subculture revolving entirely around the said sex act not to mention having billions of people regularly discussing the said sex act, making videos of the said sex act and promoting the said sex act as woke.

Tell me again which society cares more about peoples' private sexual affairs.

The one banning them. The other one seems to be hugely supportive of personal freedom.

Why do you hate personal freedom?

Don't know why we got to talking about LGBTQ+ stereotypes though, what's it gotta do with the Clairmont article?

[Machismo]

You put it at 1800, not me. You have zero clue which date I meant so don't put words in my mouth.

Keeping something banned != banning it.

In the distant past someone cared about it enough to ban it. Quite possibly because diseases are easily transmitted through anal contact. They didn't have condoms for safe sex and they probably didn't understand what a disease was so they thought it was divine punishment. So they banned it. It was banned until technological progress (= condoms) happened and it made sense to revise the cultural norms and mores.

Once again, keeping things as they are and not revising them is the opposite of caring. They knew that their ancestors thought that it was bad and banned it. They didn't have evidence to the contrary. So they kept things as they were. It's as apathetic as one can be about an issue.

Your problem is that you think that historically people were evil, heartless monsters. In reality they were doing things that made sense to them instead of actively making others suffer for teh lulz as you seem to think.

You said before Freud wrote his "masterpiece.

When questioned, that was the metric you chose to use.

So, when exactly do you want to go back to?

I'll wait.

I think historically, people were authoritarians, especially regarding social issues.

[Wilfire]

The one banning them. The other one seems to be hugely supportive of personal freedom.

Why do you hate personal freedom?

Don't know why we got to talking about LGBTQ+ stereotypes though, what's it gotta do with the Clairmont article?

I hate personal freedom because people abuse it like a shiny new toy.

By suggesting educational methods best suited to prepare the children of the world for the responsibilities of freedom;

-from the UNESCO Constitution, an organization dedicated to upholding personal freedoms.

You ran your education into the ground and created a generation that sees freedom as a toy. It's more akin to a gun. Gun safety is taught. Freedom safety isn't.

[Machismo]

I hate personal freedom because people abuse it like a shiny new toy.


-from the UNESCO Constitution, an organization dedicated to upholding personal freedoms.

You ran your education into the ground and created a generation that sees freedom as a toy. It's more akin to a gun. Gun safety is taught. Freedom safety isn't.

How... fascist of you.

Meanwhile, you want to go back to a time when there was less freedom, because you want to lie about them supposedly not caring.

You care so much, you want to take away their fucking freedom.

[Antipathy1018]

I literally quoted where you jumped to the conclusion, I replied to the comment.

Are you seriously pissed at me that you don't remember what you just typed?

Your. Quote. Was. The. Content.

You quoted a post with 2 replies one to Feral, one to you. You gave no context to which you responding to. Now if you deleted the reply to you I made and just quoted what I said to Feral I would have know. Again context, don't quote 2 different replies to different people if you want someone to know what you are talking about.

[Kaleredar]

Having a law against a certain sex act vs. having parades promoting the said sex act, having laws protecting the said sex act from hate speech, having a subculture revolving entirely around the said sex act not to mention having billions of people regularly discussing the said sex act, making videos of the said sex act and promoting the said sex act as woke.

Tell me again which society cares more about peoples' private sexual affairs.

You seem to be the only one wanting to tell people what to do here in saying what people can and can’t talk about.

And if you don’t like people trying to vocally normalize lgbtq behavior, maybe your should blame the conservatives and the laws they passed in the past that forced lgbtq people into hiding such that society demonized them for hundreds of years, thus necessitating them fighting long and hard for their rights to be treated as human beings which incidentally requires them bringing their historical persecution to the forefront so that people know about it and the conservative laws and people that repressed them.

Tell me, are you also for banning women from wearing certain traditional Muslim religious garments because you feel that the women are being told what they can wear? So that you then feel the need to... tell them what they can wear?

[Felya]

You ran your education into the ground and created a generation that sees freedom as a toy. It's more akin to a gun. Gun safety is taught. Freedom safety isn't.

Because guns are objects that are a few hundred years old, while freedom is concept that is as old as conciseness.

[Machismo]

You quoted a post with 2 replies one to Feral, one to you. You gave no context to which you responding to. Now if you deleted the reply to you I made and just quoted what I said to Feral I would have know. Again context, don't quote 2 different replies to different people if you want someone to know what you are talking about.

Once again, don't blame me, because you don't remember what you just said, and couldn't be bothered to read me quoting you.

"How could I possibly know you meant the false conclusion I just jumped to, and the one you quoted me making?!?!?!?"

[Endus]

You put it at 1800, not me. You have zero clue which date I meant so don't put words in my mouth.

Keeping something banned != banning it.

A distinction without meaning.

A ban like this requires constant pressure. Choosing to continue applying that pressure is a positive decision made every day.

It's like saying "I just took over holding a pillow over this guy's head, it's the first guy's fault for putting it on him in the first place" as a defense for murdering that guy. That would never hold up in court, because you made a positive choice to hold that pillow every moment that you did so.

In the distant past someone cared about it enough to ban it. Quite possibly because diseases are easily transmitted through anal contact. They didn't have condoms for safe sex and they probably didn't understand what a disease was so they thought it was divine punishment. So they banned it. It was banned until technological progress (= condoms) happened and it made sense to revise the cultural norms and mores.

This is absolute horseshit, because A> plenty of ancient cultures (hello, ancient Greece) had no problems with anal sex, and B> STDs have existed as long as humanity has and that doesn't require anal contact.

You're just nakedly supporting homophobia, here.

Once again, keeping things as they are and not revising them is the opposite of caring. They knew that their ancestors thought that it was bad and banned it. They didn't have evidence to the contrary. So they kept things as they were. It's as apathetic as one can be about an issue.

It isn't "apathetic" at all. It's active hatred and oppression. If my father beat me as a child and I decide to beat my child in turn, I don't get to hand-wave that away by saying I'm just continuing a pattern of abuse. I'm making a choice to hit my kid every time I raise my hand, and I should absolutely be condemned for that. It's entirely my responsibility and fault, not my father's before me.

Your problem is that you think that historically people were evil, heartless monsters. In reality they were doing things that made sense to them instead of actively making others suffer for teh lulz as you seem to think.

You know, like Hitler.

Same argument you're making applies to Hitler and the Holocaust, dude.

That's how incredibly bad your argument is.

[Machismo]

I hate personal freedom because people abuse it like a shiny new toy.


-from the UNESCO Constitution, an organization dedicated to upholding personal freedoms.

You ran your education into the ground and created a generation that sees freedom as a toy. It's more akin to a gun. Gun safety is taught. Freedom safety isn't.

"I don't care what you do, so long as you're not free to do it!!!"

[Antipathy1018]

Once again, don't blame me, because you don't remember what you just said, and couldn't be bothered to read me quoting you.

"How could I possibly know you meant the false conclusion I just jumped to, and the one you quoted me making?!?!?!?"

Do you just like to argue? Why would any sane person think when you quote 2 replies that you were not engaging with the original discussion?

All you had to do to get you point across was delete some text and this whole thing could have been avoided. Also at the time it looked as if he was taking a shot at me, and when I found out I was wrong I apologized.

Seriously just make your posts clearer as to what you are talking about, instead of either making broad sweeping statements, or quoting multiple things without pointing out which you are talking about.

[GreenGoldSharpie]

Leave it to Wildfire to come in here and demonstrate how fucked up this fascist shit is.