Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by PrimaryColor View Post
    Can straight people ever be denied service? The laws should apply to both the groups the exact same.
    The laws do... "can not be denied service based on sexual orientation" tends to be used in most of the equal rights laws.

  2. #42
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by PrimaryColor View Post
    Can straight people ever be denied service? The laws should apply to both groups the exact same.
    On the basis of being straight? No, they shouldn't be able to be denied services that the business provides to the public.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  3. #43
    The Unstoppable Force PC2's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    21,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Algathor View Post
    The laws do... "can not be denied service based on sexual orientation" tends to be used in most of the equal rights laws.
    Cool, so if it occurs it is a judicial matter.

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by PrimaryColor View Post
    Cool, so if it occurs it is a judicial matter.
    Yes, if someone denies service because a person is straight, they would be protected under those laws. Now if a person, be it straight or gay, is being an ass and the business removes them for that, that is a different story.

  5. #45
    The Insane Thage's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Δ Hidden Forbidden Holy Ground
    Posts
    19,105
    Quote Originally Posted by Algathor View Post
    Trigger warnings are just a new term for "this may contain graphic or troubling content, viewer discretion is advised", which has been around for as long as I can remember in media.
    Basically this. Trigger warnings are voluntary self-policing so people who have triggered panic attacks can avoid the content; it's no different from the Parental Advisory labels on music CDs or the ESRB Ratings system except that it isn't being enforced on others by anyone worth taking seriously (as in, anyone not from the lunatic fringe).

    Also, I thought wikileaks was about fighting corruption in governments. This is a little out of place in my eyes.
    "You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain." Wikileaks' philosophy started to change back around the time Assange went on the run.
    Be seeing you guys on Bloodsail Buccaneers NA!



  6. #46
    Putting a content note at the front of a document is censorship? That is just retarded.
    "Just because you read it on the internet, doesn't mean the person actually said it." - Thomas Jefferson

  7. #47
    The Unstoppable Force PC2's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    21,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Algathor View Post
    Yes, if someone denies service because a person is straight, they would be protected under those laws. Now if a person, be it straight or gay, is being an ass and the business removes them for that, that is a different story.
    Yes and the judicial system exists to decide on each incident. We don't want society pre-judging people, as in before all of the information has been presented and given due diligence.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    And that is why I call myself a "SJW". But for me, it only applies when opinions are used to create law that restrict another person's freedom. (given that the freedom is not about harming other people.)
    Movements outside of government can do just as much to hurt the freedom of others. Hitler's brown shirts were terrorizing Jews long before the Nazis officially rose to power. Movements today, fueled by supposed 'SJW' ideology, relish the idea of gaining power through large scale disruptions. These people don't want to have discussions, they want to shout in the faces of people who attempt to have a discussion with them. They are just as ideologically sure of their righteousness as any other ideology that has ended in disaster.
    Most people would rather die than think, and most people do. -Bertrand Russell
    Before the camps, I regarded the existence of nationality as something that shouldn’t be noticed - nationality did not really exist, only humanity. But in the camps one learns: if you belong to a successful nation you are protected and you survive. If you are part of universal humanity - too bad for you -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by PrimaryColor View Post
    Yes and the judicial system exists to decide on each incident. We don't want society pre-judging people, as in before all of the information has been presented and given due diligence.
    Good luck with that one though, society pre-judges anyone the moment they are accused of something. That is a fight that is fairly futile.

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by zorkuus View Post
    Be a jerk, I don't have to listen. Problem solved. Didn't sound so difficult now did it?
    On the other end of the spectrum is cencorship. Which one is a more reasonable solution?
    Who gets to decide what is unwanted speech?
    Why is it your right to dictate that those on the receiving end should just ignore it.
    As I said, it is always about dictating what those on the receiving end should do, instead of those dishing it out taking responsibility for their actions.
    Instead it is always someone else's fault if they are "offended".
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadmanWalking View Post
    Your forgot to include the part where we blame casuals for everything because blizzard is catering to casuals when casuals got jack squat for new content the entire expansion, like new dungeons and scenarios.
    Quote Originally Posted by Reinaerd View Post
    T'is good to see there are still people valiantly putting the "Ass" in assumption.

  11. #51
    I am Murloc! Cyanotical's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    5,553
    there is a difference between an equality law and opinion suppression though, you can't or at least shouldn't discriminate against someone because of something they are, ie, race, sexuality, or gender. its not like you choose to be born a certain way, however that doesn't mean you should press to have someone's opinion suppressed because you disagree with them, or because you find it offensive.

    everyone has an opinion on something, but opinions are not sacred, they don't need to be listened to or honored (this includes personal religions). we've agreed that as a society we shouldn't treat people differently because of who they are, but that doesn't mean we should adapt who we are to meet someone else's opinion. you don't have to like someone because of who they are, but you do have to treat them like an equal person.

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Thage View Post
    "You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain." Wikileaks' philosophy started to change back around the time Assange went on the run.
    Perhaps he evolved to realize that there is far more nuance in the world than just saying the only malevolent force we need to watch out for is the state. What about the people who decide which books get published? Or the people who run universities/academia? It isn't only about state institutions, it is about the corruptibility of power in general.
    Most people would rather die than think, and most people do. -Bertrand Russell
    Before the camps, I regarded the existence of nationality as something that shouldn’t be noticed - nationality did not really exist, only humanity. But in the camps one learns: if you belong to a successful nation you are protected and you survive. If you are part of universal humanity - too bad for you -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by ComputerNerd View Post
    Instead it is always someone else's fault if they are "offended".
    No. But someone is always offended by something. We cannot construct a society where everyone is protected from being offended, it's not possible.

  14. #54
    I'm impressed that people have managed to turn "Shut Up and Take It" to be the non coward way to approach this stuff.

  15. #55
    The Unstoppable Force PC2's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    21,877
    Quote Originally Posted by ComputerNerd View Post
    Instead it is always someone else's fault if they are "offended".
    Yeah, getting offended at something that is not illegal is the offendee's fault. Sure you can cause a stink and maybe get back at 1 person per incident, but most of society will see social vigilantism as regressive.

    If you want a new law, be honest and say that, so it can be analyzed in the public arena.
    Last edited by PC2; 2015-11-09 at 09:58 PM.

  16. #56
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by PrimaryColor View Post
    Yeah, getting offended at something that is not illegal is the offendee's fault. Sure you can cause a stink and maybe get back at 1 person per incident, but most of society will see social vigilantism as regressive.

    If you want a new law, be honest and say that, so it can be analyzed in the public arena.
    I disagree. If someone walks into a grocery store in Harlem and loudly says, "You know this neighborhood wasn't so bad before all the niggers and kikes moved in," it isn't the fault of the offendee when they get offended. Because what the person said is indeed offensive, but not illegal.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  17. #57
    Banned JohnBrown1917's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Обединени социалистически щати на Америка
    Posts
    28,394
    Quote Originally Posted by The Batman View Post
    Pretty much. Gaming communities seem to bitch loudly and push anti-SJW opinions.
    Sounds like a good thing. I dont see the problem

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by unfilteredJW View Post
    I'm impressed that people have managed to turn "Shut Up and Take It" to be the non coward way to approach this stuff.
    Yes, because people who tell people to face some things that happen in real life like adults are cowards as opposed to those who scream "microaggression". Some of the pathetic examples of this include "too many whites in room microaggression!" or "He looked at me for too long microaggression" etc. The whole word itself is one of the most pathetic examples of cowardness. I don't know how any normal function adult is so pathetic that they make some completely normal situations as threatening. There must be some mental ilness behind this.

    Honestly what do you think about safe spaces and microaggressions?

  19. #59
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by luc54 View Post
    Yes, because people who tell people to face some things that happen in real life like adults are cowards as opposed to those who scream "microaggression". Some of the pathetic examples of this include "too many whites in room microaggression!" or "He looked at me for too long microaggression" etc. The whole word itself is one of the most pathetic examples of cowardness. I don't know how any normal function adult is so pathetic that they make some completely normal situations as threatening. There must be some mental ilness behind this.

    Honestly what do you think about safe spaces and microaggressions?
    You're the first person I've ever heard use the word. Since it appears to be so uncommon, I have to wonder why it bothers you so much.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  20. #60
    Banned JohnBrown1917's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Обединени социалистически щати на Америка
    Posts
    28,394
    im impressed how every sjw thread turns into a semantics debate.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Reeve View Post
    You're the first person I've ever heard use the word. Since it appears to be so uncommon, I have to wonder why it bothers you so much.
    I keep hearing the word all the time, it even made it onto south park/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •