New homophobic viral video

Disgustingly misleading video title

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the cross...

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Re: New homophobic viral video

#21  Postby Thommo » Jan 11, 2018 4:41 pm

Tracer Tong wrote:It looks to me like a list of things that harms others and/or oneself, a further example of which is supposedly participating in homosexual relationships. Nowhere do I see an argument that "people shouldn't do something because someone else believes its harmful".


The whole point of this campaign is to tell people not to indulge in homosexual behaviour and to try and get corrective therapy. That's literally what this organisation is arguing for.

Tracer Tong wrote:If you don't think it's possible to change such people's minds, that's fine, I guess. I'm rather of the view that seeds of doubt can be sown, and that's it's important to represent the positions one disagrees with properly. Note that this isn't about lending any degree of sympathy.


Well, fair enough. I certainly don't think I'll be changing the minds of these campaigners by my posts on ratskep, or sowing seeds of doubt regardless of what tack I take though.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 22076

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: New homophobic viral video

#22  Postby Thommo » Jan 11, 2018 4:43 pm

laklak wrote:It's difficult for someone from the UK or mainland Europe to understand just how medieval these people's thought processes are. You have to live among them to get the full bat-shit flavor.


I don't think you're actually supposed to lick them. :ask:
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 22076

Print view this post

Re: New homophobic viral video

#23  Postby laklak » Jan 11, 2018 4:45 pm

I figured since they eat their God and drink His blood, a little lick wouldn't hurt anybody.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 16687
Age: 63
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: New homophobic viral video

#24  Postby Tracer Tong » Jan 11, 2018 5:02 pm

Thommo wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:It looks to me like a list of things that harms others and/or oneself, a further example of which is supposedly participating in homosexual relationships. Nowhere do I see an argument that "people shouldn't do something because someone else believes its harmful".


The whole point of this campaign is to tell people not to indulge in homosexual behaviour and to try and get corrective therapy. That's literally what this organisation is arguing for.


I don't disagree, but I still don't see an argument that "people shouldn't do something because someone else believes its harmful", though. Their argument (to the extent they have one) is, in my view, a poor one, but this isn't it.

laklak wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote: But it’s probably a good idea to understand where they’re coming from. Heck, it may even be that in doing that, you may one day be in a position whereby you’ve an opportunity to change someone’s mind.

A radical thought, that!


As a general rule I agree, but I've dealt with this sort of fundy Xtian my entire life, and can count on one hand the number of them who were willing to even listen to an opposing viewpoint, let alone actually change their position. They're righteous, you see.

It's difficult for someone from the UK or mainland Europe to understand just how medieval these people's thought processes are. You have to live among them to get the full bat-shit flavor.


At this point, I've dealt with enough fundamentalist Christians that pretty much nothing would surprise me, and I don't doubt that trying to dialogue with some of them is completely pointless.

But given the background of the author of the quotations in the OP, I suspect she would be at least prepared to do some listening. And people are generally more willing to do that when you're representing their beliefs carefully and fairly.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1301
Male

Country: England
England (eng)
Print view this post

Re: New homophobic viral video

#25  Postby Thommo » Jan 11, 2018 5:04 pm

Tracer Tong wrote:
Thommo wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:It looks to me like a list of things that harms others and/or oneself, a further example of which is supposedly participating in homosexual relationships. Nowhere do I see an argument that "people shouldn't do something because someone else believes its harmful".


The whole point of this campaign is to tell people not to indulge in homosexual behaviour and to try and get corrective therapy. That's literally what this organisation is arguing for.


I don't disagree, but I still don't see an argument that "people shouldn't do something because someone else believes its harmful", though. Their argument (to the extent they have one) is, in my view, a poor one, but this isn't it.


Clearly we disagree. I think their argument can be phrased exactly in that form, namely:

"[Other] people shouldn't be homosexual because I believe it is harmful".
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 22076

Print view this post

Re: New homophobic viral video

#26  Postby Tracer Tong » Jan 11, 2018 6:33 pm

Thommo wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:
Thommo wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:It looks to me like a list of things that harms others and/or oneself, a further example of which is supposedly participating in homosexual relationships. Nowhere do I see an argument that "people shouldn't do something because someone else believes its harmful".


The whole point of this campaign is to tell people not to indulge in homosexual behaviour and to try and get corrective therapy. That's literally what this organisation is arguing for.


I don't disagree, but I still don't see an argument that "people shouldn't do something because someone else believes its harmful", though. Their argument (to the extent they have one) is, in my view, a poor one, but this isn't it.


Clearly we disagree. I think their argument can be phrased exactly in that form, namely:

"[Other] people shouldn't be homosexual because I believe it is harmful".


Now that's a different argument you're suggesting they've made, but still looks incorrect. The correct characterisation is something like "People shouldn't be homosexual because it is sinful and harmful". It's what they regard as the facts of homosexuality's sinfulness and harmfulness that matter for them, not their commitment to these putative facts.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1301
Male

Country: England
England (eng)
Print view this post

Re: New homophobic viral video

#27  Postby Thommo » Jan 11, 2018 6:37 pm

Tracer Tong wrote:
Thommo wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:
Thommo wrote:

The whole point of this campaign is to tell people not to indulge in homosexual behaviour and to try and get corrective therapy. That's literally what this organisation is arguing for.


I don't disagree, but I still don't see an argument that "people shouldn't do something because someone else believes its harmful", though. Their argument (to the extent they have one) is, in my view, a poor one, but this isn't it.


Clearly we disagree. I think their argument can be phrased exactly in that form, namely:

"[Other] people shouldn't be homosexual because I believe it is harmful".


Now that's a different argument you're suggesting they've made, but still looks incorrect. The correct characterisation is something like "People shouldn't be homosexual because it is sinful and harmful". It's what they regard as the facts of homosexuality's sinfulness and harmfulness that matter for them, not their commitment to these putative facts.


Then what function does the deliberate juxtaposition of the text I responded to serve?
“Should you stop beating your wife even if you really want to continue? YES. Should you not kill someone even if you’re really wanting to go through with it? YES.
Should you get clean if you have a drug problem and are destroying yourself and those who love you even if you still like getting high? YES. Should you stop cheating on your spouse even if you like the attention you’re getting from someone else? YES,”


I see no other purpose for a list of specifics of varying character and all of the same form than to imply or affirm the generalisation.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 22076

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: New homophobic viral video

#28  Postby Tracer Tong » Jan 11, 2018 7:29 pm

Thommo wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:
Thommo wrote:
Tracer Tong wrote:

I don't disagree, but I still don't see an argument that "people shouldn't do something because someone else believes its harmful", though. Their argument (to the extent they have one) is, in my view, a poor one, but this isn't it.


Clearly we disagree. I think their argument can be phrased exactly in that form, namely:

"[Other] people shouldn't be homosexual because I believe it is harmful".


Now that's a different argument you're suggesting they've made, but still looks incorrect. The correct characterisation is something like "People shouldn't be homosexual because it is sinful and harmful". It's what they regard as the facts of homosexuality's sinfulness and harmfulness that matter for them, not their commitment to these putative facts.


Then what function does the deliberate juxtaposition of the text I responded to serve?
“Should you stop beating your wife even if you really want to continue? YES. Should you not kill someone even if you’re really wanting to go through with it? YES.
Should you get clean if you have a drug problem and are destroying yourself and those who love you even if you still like getting high? YES. Should you stop cheating on your spouse even if you like the attention you’re getting from someone else? YES,”


I see no other purpose for a list of specifics of varying character and all of the same form than to imply or affirm the generalisation.


Right: and homosexuality is supposed to be a further example of something that is harmful to onself or others, but something that one may want to do anyway, and in that way is analogous to the examples cited. But I don’t know what this has to do with the characterisations of their argument that you’ve provided so far.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1301
Male

Country: England
England (eng)
Print view this post

Re: New homophobic viral video

#29  Postby Thommo » Jan 11, 2018 8:04 pm

I think we're probably going around in circles now, I've already said that I think they've listed a number of specifics following that form with the intention of justifying the general following that form, and it was that generalisation you asked me to explain.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 22076

Print view this post

Re: New homophobic viral video

#30  Postby Tracer Tong » Jan 11, 2018 8:10 pm

Thommo wrote:I think we're probably going around in circles now, I've already said that I think they've listed a number of specifics following that form with the intention of justifying the general following that form, and it was that generalisation you asked me to explain.


I’ve asked you to explain where you get the idea from that their argument is “people shouldn't do something because someone else believes its harmful". I don’t see anything remotely like that in the quoted text, so if it’s from somewhere else, you’re welcome to link me.

As for the generalisation they’re getting at, it’s along the lines that people shouldn’t harm others, or even oneself, even if one enjoys engaging in the harmful behaviour. Homosexuality is supposed to be a case of this, as is adultery and drug abuse.
User avatar
Tracer Tong
 
Posts: 1301
Male

Country: England
England (eng)
Print view this post

Re: New homophobic viral video

#31  Postby Thommo » Jan 11, 2018 9:04 pm

On the grounds that we assume she isn't talking to herself, that's what I'm saying, it's all there and I'll just be repeating myself if I go over it again now.

Your restatement is that she is telling people "that people shouldn't harm others... even if one enjoys engaging in the harmful behaviour". My original post that we are trying to clarify was that her behaviour was harmful to others and she shouldn't do it even if she enjoys (or otherwise profits from) engaging in it.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 22076

Print view this post

Previous

Return to Christianity

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest