What's wrong with being gay?

[Daedalus X]

This thread is a continuation of an off topic conversation from here.

First, I think that we all agree that it's important to promote understanding, respect, and equality for all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation. Everyone should be treated with dignity and allowed to express their identity without fear of discrimination or harm.


Question for debate is LGTBQIA2S+ a harmless social contagion, or are there serious unintended consequences awaiting the individuals and societies that are going down this road?

[Clownboat]

You do love moving the goal post.

This is nothing but slander. It is not to debate.

The argument was the whole time about existence: whether laws for bulling to exist or not.

This was addressed. The specific examples that you provided were already crimes. I have been begging you to inform us all as to what we don't have that you would like for us to have. In place of advancing the debate, you're being a bully. An ineffective one, but a bully none the less.

My stance is that good men need to do something about bullies, so I call you out for the behavior you are displaying here. You wouldn't sit across from me in person and say the things you say here as your keyboard wouldn't be there to protect you.

I was for existence of such laws you weren't.

Now this may be something worth debate. What laws are you for existing that I'm not?

[alexxcJRO]

This is nothing but slander. It is not to debate.

Pointing to the logical fallacies and dishonest behaviour, dishonest debate tactic is part of debate. People do it here often. Usually with apologetics which is usually accompanied by dishonesty.
The fact that you whine about slander when you were first to accuse me of something in first post to me, then of bulling repeatedly is rich and comical.
I as oppose to you I was not whining of you accusing me of virtue signaling and bulling. I brought arguments why i was not doing that. We are on a debate site.

This was addressed. The specific examples that you provided were already crimes. I have been begging you to inform us all as to what we don't have that you would like for us to have. In place of advancing the debate, you're being a bully. An ineffective one, but a bully none the less.

1.
Dear sir mirroring events or general statements about humans or personal remarks (pointing to the dishonest tactics) or personal remarks in a debate which can get heated is not bulling conform the definition.
2.
Sir ridicule is not bulling. I have been debunking this argument already:
You have ridiculed yourself. There is no one sided situation.
You are not in a state of fear and in a less favorable position where I being in a more favorable position would use that position to hurt you. There is plenty of evidence for that.
We have been over this. The conditions for bulling are not meet.
Nor was I equating bulling with physical assault, stealing. I have been debunking this argument already.
Torture laws exists even though we have laws for physical assault.

You wouldn't sit across from me in person and say the things you say here as your keyboard wouldn't be there to protect you.
Can you do that, or is this just a place for you to be an online bully? What I mean by that is, the way you have spoken to be here online, is not how I would allow you to speak to me in person. You wouldn't dare and you know it, but you are safe to bully here as I'm not weaker then you, so your bullying is ineffective. As we all know, bullies are often cowards and calling someone names and then hiding behind a computer is just what bullies do, even ineffective bullies.

I don't even know what to respond to this. Weird.
Please don't avoid again:
Q: So do you now agree its ok to have laws for bulling(online) but not laws for bulling that occurs in schools? Why?

Not only is it ok for us to have laws for online bullying, that is in fact something we already have. We can stop discussing such a thing and now focus on what else (something we don't have) that you want to have

Moving of the goal post.

Not only is it ok for us to have laws for online bullying, that is in fact something we already have. We can stop discussing such a thing and now focus on what else (something we don't have) that you want to have. Are you willing and able to articulate for us as to what you want? It's ok if you can't (I don't believe you can at this point) and I still agree with your original virtuous claim.
If you have any debate questions to offer me that are worth a reply, please present them and I'll answer them. I mean actual debate questions though, not slanderous claims. Something that will further the debate.

Changhing like the weather: “You were arguing that I am bulling you in a supposed clever way to show how its not ok to have laws for bulling(online), how its to hard to prove it.
Suddenly in 255 you have sneaked in "cyber bullying" beside assault or theft where before we only had you mentioning assault or theft. Suddenly its ok to have laws for bulling.
Now you pretend like that never happened.
Sir you never mentioned cyber bullying before post 255.
I argued bulling needs to be punished. Both online and in schools. You were not.”
You cannot change the past. Its done.

For example, what bullying laws would you like to see put in place that we don't have already?
I truly wish that you would offer up a specific bullying law that you want enacted. Then we could discuss that in place of the ineffective bullying behavior that you display here.

The whole time I was arguing for existence of such laws. You brought forth multiple things why they should not exist.
I debunked all of them.

Q: Why do you wanna change the subject now so desperately?

[Clownboat]

Please don't avoid again:
Q: So do you now agree its ok to have laws for bulling(online) but not laws for bulling that occurs in schools? Why?

I do not agree with this statement.
For all I know, you have some good ideas that we should all consider about bullying laws we should enact in our schools. We will never know though unless you share your ideas with the class.
Please, for the love of all that is holy... what is it that you are proposing that we should enact as a law in our schools to inhibit bullying?

So far, your answer seems to be: "I have nothing, I'm just here to sound virtuous?"
If so, that is ok, besides for not having anything worthy to debate on a debate forum.

Q: Why do you wanna change the subject now so desperately?

I don't want to change the subject. I remain wanting to know what laws you would like enacted in our schools to inhibit bullies. What do you have to offer?

Once again, I responded to 100% of the questions you asked of me. Will you now do the same in return? Perhaps we will have something to debate in place of you calling me names and insulting me. You know, like what a bully does to others.




I would like to point out one thing to the readers though: (alexxcJRO, please don't read this if it will cause you to ignore the one and only question being asked of you above).
From the post above: "You are not in a state of fear and in a less favorable position where I being in a more favorable position would use that position to hurt you."
Said poster is using this reasoning to defend their bullying behavior in this thread and this is part of the problem as I see it. How is a potential bully, like the one who said these words suppose to know my state of fear or whether I'm in a more or less favorable position? Calling people names and insulting them are activities that a bully participates in. Could you imagine calling someone a moron in debate to only find out later that they are fearful and in a less favorable position and now you are found guilty for the crime of bullying? Perhaps the first few times a victim is called a moron, they roll with the punch. At some point, this same person might now feel fear and now a crime has been committed without the now criminal even being aware that they are committing a crime.

I personally would want to know that I would be committing a crime, before I actually commit the crime, so I can avoid committing said crime. Creating laws around how another 'feels' (like what state of fear a person claims they are feeling) would make this very difficult. I'm not sure I can get behind 'feeling laws' quite yet. Would we need two branches of enforcement? Those that enforce laws and those that enforce feelings?

[alexxcJRO]

Please, for the love of all that is holy... what is it that you are proposing that we should enact as a law in our schools to inhibit bullying?
So far, your answer seems to be: "I have nothing, I'm just here to sound virtuous?"
If so, that is ok, besides for not having anything worthy to debate on a debate forum.

1.
Don't bore with pathetic attempts to move the goal post. The point of argumentation was if laws for bulling should exist.

Please don't avoid again:
Q: So do you now agree its ok to have laws for bulling(online) but not laws for bulling that occurs in schools? Why?

2.
If someone argues for existence of laws for same sex marriages in Romania with someone X which argues they should not exist because of a, b, c, ... why should that person have to actually make the laws.
There are people who do such a thing for a living.
It's like saying if Martin Luther King Jr. argued for laws for racism and did not make the laws he just wanted to sound virtuous.
One can argues for existence of laws that cover X thing without actually making the laws. There are people who do this for a living. Make laws for government to pass.

Said poster is using this reasoning to defend their bullying behavior in this thread and this is part of the problem as I see it. How is a potential bully, like the one who said these words suppose to know my state of fear or whether I'm in a more or less favorable position? Calling people names and insulting them are activities that a bully participates in. Could you imagine calling someone a moron in debate to only find out later that they are fearful and in a less favorable position and now you are found guilty for the crime of bullying? Perhaps the first few times a victim is called a moron, they roll with the punch. At some point, this same person might now feel fear and now a crime has been committed without the now criminal even being aware that they are committing a crime.

There is evidence to the contrary of this. You were having fun and ridiculed back. Emoticons and your use of words prove this.
Don't bore me please. Nobody bulled you. It does not match the definition I provided.

This felt more like a boxing match were both adversaries throw punches. Other imaginings are only delusions.

It is tragic and comedy at this point that the person who started the name calling and personal remarks(what prompted my mirroring events) is whining about name calling and personal remarks.

[oldbadger]

Here is a plot by two teenagers upon one other, they invited a teenaged girl to meet them both in local park and the lone teen went to meet with them. The lone girl happens to have transferred gender, previously.

Now which or any of these outcomes might be considered to be a criminal offence .......?

1. They surprise the lone teen and take her bag from her, throwing it in the nearby lake.

2. They tell her that their other friends have set fire to her home, leaving her stressed and terrified.

3. They attack her and tear her clothes, break her spectacles.

4. They force her down on to her face and then stab her scores of times. She dies.

[Clownboat]

Don't bore with pathetic attempts to move the goal post. The point of argumentation was if laws for bulling should exist.

Do you feel that laws for bullying should exist? If so, please explain which laws you are referring to and perhaps we can find something to agree on.
Your accusation that I'm moving the goal posts in not an accurate one.

Q: So do you now agree its ok to have laws for bulling(online) but not laws for bulling that occurs in schools? Why?

I continue to answer this question and you continue to play pretend that I haven't.
Copy/paste from post 293:
I do not agree with this statement.
For all I know, you have some good ideas that we should all consider about bullying laws we should enact in our schools. We will never know though unless you share your ideas with the class.
Please, for the love of all that is holy... what is it that you are proposing that we should enact as a law in our schools to inhibit bullying?

If someone argues for existence of laws for same sex marriages in Romania with someone X which argues they should not exist because of a, b, c, ... why should that person have to actually make the laws.

Strawman. No one has argued that any said person must make the laws. However, if you have something of substance for us all to consider, please let us know. For example, what would you like to become a crime that isn't already? Perhaps we can get this into legislation someday.

There are people who do such a thing for a living.

Yup, and there are people that virtue signal. I agree with your virtuous notion about being against bullies and protecting victims. You have my agreement and can go away now, unless that is you have more to offer than a virtuous statement.

Since you like mirror games:
Clownboat would like to pass laws to end world hunger and to cure all diseases! Please don't ask me for details though, because in fact I'm just saying this to sound virtuous. I really don't have anything to discuss. Other people make laws anyway.

It's like saying if Martin Luther King Jr. argued for laws for racism and did not make the laws he just wanted to sound virtuous.

No need to consider Martin Luther as you are the one virtue signaling here. I'm doing my best to stop you by giving you chances to explain what you mean when you make your agreed to virtuous statement.

One can argues for existence of laws that cover X thing without actually making the laws.

There would be nothing to debate if all a person had to offer was virtue signaling. You must realize this as it is what is preventing us from debating. Your on a debate site for crying out loud. Debate or virtue signal elsewhere please.

There are people who do this for a living. Make laws for government to pass.

No one has argued that there aren't such people. Now, do you have anything worthwhile to discuss in regards to passing bullying laws? No, you're just here to sound virtuous? That's odd and I would like to unsubscribe from your newsletter.

There is evidence to the contrary of this. You were having fun and ridiculed back.

I have never argued that I have not bullied you. I have in fact ridiculed you.

Don't bore me please. Nobody bulled you. It does not match the definition I provided.

Does a bully call another a moron? Would a bully insult another about how they debate? Would a bully ridicule? The answer is yes, but not necessarily... which brings us back to my and PurpleKnights concern that you have been unable to address.

It is tragic and comedy at this point that the person who started the name calling and personal remarks(what prompted my mirroring events) is whining about name calling and personal remarks.

You are mistaken about me whining here. Both of us have committed actions that a bully commits. However, you know I'm not a weak opponent when compared to yourself, so you are safe in your actions. I'm not convinced the same is true when it comes to you, so how can I know if I would be guilty of the bullying crimes you have yet to imagine? Surely there is more to it than you just being weaker than myself, no? I believe I have measured your weakness here in this thread in fact and am now worried that I have bullied you. Is anything I have done here something you would like to become a crime?

[Clownboat]

Here is a plot by two teenagers upon one other, they invited a teenaged girl to meet them both in local park and the lone teen went to meet with them. The lone girl happens to have transferred gender, previously.

Now which or any of these outcomes might be considered to be a criminal offence .......?

1. They surprise the lone teen and take her bag from her, throwing it in the nearby lake.

2. They tell her that their other friends have set fire to her home, leaving her stressed and terrified.

3. They attack her and tear her clothes, break her spectacles.

4. They force her down on to her face and then stab her scores of times. She dies.

Is this aimed at myself or alexxcJRO? I'll answer in case this is addressed to me, to help foster debate.

All 4 acts are crimes. Gender is irrelevant.

[oldbadger]

Here is a plot by two teenagers upon one other, they invited a teenaged girl to meet them both in local park and the lone teen went to meet with them. The lone girl happens to have transferred gender, previously.

Now which or any of these outcomes might be considered to be a criminal offence .......?

1. They surprise the lone teen and take her bag from her, throwing it in the nearby lake.

2. They tell her that their other friends have set fire to her home, leaving her stressed and terrified.

3. They attack her and tear her clothes, break her spectacles.

4. They force her down on to her face and then stab her scores of times. She dies.

Is this aimed at myself or alexxcJRO? I'll answer in case this is addressed to me, to help foster debate.

All 4 acts are crimes. Gender is irrelevant.

The question is there for anybody.

All of these can develop from bullying. Nos 1,2 &3 are clearly bullying, 4 is obviously murder.

No 4 happened to a transgender girl a few weeks ago, the murders were girl and boy aged 15 & 16.

[alexxcJRO]

Do you feel that laws for bullying should exist? If so, please explain which laws you are referring to and perhaps we can find something to agree on.
Your accusation that I'm moving the goal posts in not an accurate one.
Please, for the love of all that is holy... what is it that you are proposing that we should enact as a law in our schools to inhibit bullying?
Strawman. No one has argued that any said person must make the laws. However, if you have something of substance for us all to consider, please let us know. For example, what would you like to become a crime that isn't already? Perhaps we can get this into legislation someday.
No need to consider Martin Luther as you are the one virtue signaling here. I'm doing my best to stop you by giving you chances to explain what you mean when you make your agreed to virtuous statement.

Answer please:
Q: If Martin Luther King Jr. argued for laws for racism and did not actually made the laws would you conclude he just wanted to sound virtuous?(Yes/No question)

There would be nothing to debate if all a person had to offer was virtue signaling. You must realize this as it is what is preventing us from debating. Your on a debate site for crying out loud. Debate or virtue signal elsewhere please.
No one has argued that there aren't such people. Now, do you have anything worthwhile to discuss in regards to passing bullying laws? No, you're just here to sound virtuous? That's odd and I would like to unsubscribe from your newsletter.

1.
Sir I was debating you on the subject whether bulling laws should exist or not for many pages on this thread.
Q: What are you talking about?
You brough several objection: underage critique, he/she said situations, how is hard to prosecute and prove including accusing me of bulling in a clever to show this, the supossed problem of subjectivity, the supposed problem of me equating bulling with existing crimes that have laws and so on.
I debunked and brought arguments for them in so many forms its baffling you said the above.
2.
Stop with the accusation of virtue signaling. I do not care to be perceived as morally good.
My problem with bulling comes from experiencing first hand extreme cases of bulling while I being in middle school, high school and seeying it go unpunished. It a great problem in Romania and other countries. People killed themseleves over bulling. Many lives are destroyed.

I have never argued that I have not bullied you. I have in fact ridiculed you.
Does a bully call another a moron? Would a bully insult another about how they debate? Would a bully ridicule? The answer is yes, but not necessarily... which brings us back to my and PurpleKnights concern that you have been unable to address.
You are mistaken about me whining here. Both of us have committed actions that a bully commits. However, you know I'm not a weak opponent when compared to yourself, so you are safe in your actions. I'm not convinced the same is true when it comes to you, so how can I know if I would be guilty of the bullying crimes you have yet to imagine? Surely there is more to it than you just being weaker than myself, no? I believe I have measured your weakness here in this thread in fact and am now worried that I have bullied you. Is anything I have done here something you would like to become a crime?

There was no bulling that occurred. The situation was not one sided. We have a few instances from both sides of small ridicule which mostly was indirectly expressed or implied. No one was afraid and in a state of fear. No one was in a favorable position while the other was not.
The only thing that was present: maybe some annoyance which in a debate that becomes rather heated is normal.
Ridicule its not bulling. Me and my brothers ridicule each other and laugh often when we meet. Its not bulling.
Calling someone once a moron or implying it its not bulling.

[Clownboat]

Answer please:
Q: If Martin Luther King Jr. argued for laws for racism and did not actually made the laws would you conclude he just wanted to sound virtuous?(Yes/No question)

Yes, though your question is poorly worded. Obviously he did much more than just argue though and therefore was not virtue signaling.
Since this is the ONLY question asked of me and you once again ignored EVERY SINGLE QUESTION I asked of you, I must assume that you have nothing to add to this debate. I still agree with your virtuous stance by the way, I just wish you had something to discuss or at least some idea as to what you actually wanted outside of solely voicing your anti bullying stance.

Clownboat: I want world hunger to be no more.
alexxcJRO: I agree! How do you think we might start to accomplish this?
Clownboat: I don't have any idea or thoughts about how to do it, others can put in that work.

alexxcJRO, please ask yourself if there is anything to debate about my virtuous statement that I'm sure you agree with. Welcome to my world... trying to have a debate with you!

My problem with bulling comes from experiencing first hand extreme cases of bulling while I being in middle school, high school and seeing it go unpunished.

Please understand that why you have a problem with bullying is irrelevant to our position. We share the same position on bullying after all.

It a great problem in Romania and other countries. People killed themseleves over bulling. Many lives are destroyed.

How virtuous of you to take note of this! Are you aware of all the humans that die of starvation? Did you know the number is 9 million per year? Do you sense the ridicule?

Calling someone once a moron or implying it its not bulling.

So if a group of bullies make fun of the transgender kid in school, only once each, no bullying has taken place? I disagree with your claim. Care to defend it?
Would you really support a law that would allow kids to call other kids names, but only once? What an odd position and one that would be impossible to enforce by the way.

I would like to inhibit bullying.
One way to accomplish this is for good men/women to act when they see it happening. Let's shun the bullies. Make them feel ashamed for their behavior. If bullies commit crimes, then they should be punished for said crimes. Do you take issue with my position?

I would possibly critique your position, if only you had one to discuss.