|
Debate with Razhie and I concluded
---- Hello again,Razhie! Wow, I thought I was one of the only few who spend thousands of words expressing themselves or their idea. Hypothetically, we might do well together fighting some battle, with words anyway.
---- Don't worry my "feeling" weren't hurt when you called me or it "shit","absurd","cheap', or "disgusting". Because, that's usually the response or attack someone gets when some people tried to dissect the thinking process of the people who are rather towards the left side of politics. Was that put mild enough for you? I hope that makes you feel more comfortable during this mental dissection or operation into the minds of some people who don't think like most everybody else. Yes, I agree not everybody should think alike completely but there are areas of our society where we need better analysts and planners of our education system, welfare programs, international trade policies and cooperation with the X-Files with their determination of keeping human DNA from being mixed with alien DNA which would create a new Human Hybrid! Now, before we get to the next issue ................NO, WAIT !! Relax, I was just trying to break the monotony of being too serious and add a little weird humor! Did it work?
----Let's try to get a deeper understanding of what is trying to be said about the state of mind of the far left wing citizens in our society. But, do you want to keep attacking me on how I worded the message that is trying to be delivered for people to think about?
----Why are you so hung up and focused on the fake Dr. and the fake GDS or otherwise known as Genetic Deficiency Syndrome? I guess you didn't like the way I delivered this "food for thought".
----The text of the partially fake report was not "completely and utterly a lie". Only the storyline was with humor and you should have realized that when you read "bad genetics in their POLITICAL family tree". But, maybe you were too emotionally wrapped up and affected by what you read by that point. That's okay, I understand the Human mind is not a mechanical machine but, the mental clutch can also slip some.
----Baby blue colored walls works well in soothing the disruptive spirit. Do you need baby blue colored walls in your pin? Hey, you're right! Direct personal insults are fun! But, we seem to be going in circles and I do find your response interesting. Such Vigor!
----It is not a "scam", and yes sometimes "the ends does justify the means". As long as it is done in a peaceful non-physically destructive way!
----Also, this was not a "tyrannical" nor "hateful act". My gosh, you are sounding like an enraged person that wants to only throw insulting rhetoric that makes no sense just because you are so mad. Wow. And it's a good thing you don't know what race I am or what race I may be mixed with. Because, I'm sure you would try to label me as a racist or one of those mixed raced racists! Which reminds me, I would like to ask their parents why they decided to create another race of people for our society to have to deal with. Oh, relax I just made that up and threw it in there but, I would love to see the expression on your face when you read it. No, I don't mean what was said there. But, you could have fun there, attacking me on that. But, you can't now because I retracted it!
----For many many years I have noticed how the far left liberals/Democrats are always the political party and the followers of, whom are the ones who do name-calling, untrue accusations, claims someone is a Nazi, a homophobe, etc. And wrongly cause a good Politician or other to have to spend most of their time proving those false accusations are not true. Just as I am doing here now with Razhie.
----Well,Razhie, I would like to thank you for helping me make my point about the mindset and the irrational behavior of the far left liberal when confronted with an opposing viewpoint. I did it rationally, cute, cleverly and a little bit humorously.
----And out of great respect and appreciation of the presence of this website, which I accidentally stumbled onto, I will no longer effectively change the format and expected subjects and conversations to be held on this website. My intentions were not to make anybody furious and mad but, to just interact in a civilized debate regarding an issue I felt was important to mention. And it should have been mentioned somewhere other than this website, for that I apologize. Thank you.
----
[ ]
Want to answer more questions in the Health & Fitness category?
Maybe give some free advice about: Mental health?
Although I am glad you can at least recognize the misuse of the site, but you don’t really owe me any apology for that, I just hope if you choose to stick around you’ll keep the mandate in mind.
I am not enraged in the least. I suppose because I am not trying to be cute, or a little bit humorous, it could be seen that way. I hope you can believe that, but I expect an ‘angry liberal’ will be more of your expectation. However, I'm really not doing anything other than being consistent and clear about the point I feel is the most important to make with you, and it is not a political point at all.
That point is that the behaviour you chose to engage in is not morally acceptable. Lying for political gain is a tyrannical and hateful act in a literal sense. Please consider the techniques of deceit, media control and misinformation used by tyrants, and fictionalization of science and evidence used by those who hate based on race or creed or religion. I was being quite literal when I used these words. Your distortion of evidence in attempt to get illicit a particular emotional reaction from the public does stem from that traditional of misinforming for the sake of persuading people to act against others out of fear and hate.
At very least, you were not successful at be satirical. As much as I would like to believe that was your intention and you simply didn’t achieve it well, that’s difficult to accept as true in light of the purely ideological motivational claims from your last message to me.
I have not called you any names. I have, consistently and correctly, labelled, not you as a human being, but your behaviour on this site. You have mocked my sexuality with a spouse, called into the question the ethical management of this site, and belittled me in quite a few ways offering back handed compliments flowery insults and asking disparagement rhetorical questions. Again, this is akin to trolling: Attempts to say inflammatory things to illicit a certain response. It isn’t so much that it is hurtful, as it is frustrating. I have offered you the repeated respect of having faith in your honesty and genuine belief, even when I believe you are in error, and attempted not to laden down my responses with humours rhetoric, but worked from the assumption that we were having a conversation of substance.
All I have said, and continue to say, is that I do not accept that your behaviour in your initial post was ethically correct and provided my informed arguments for this position. In this post, I have added that I find it very difficult to believe that you were merely attempting to be satirical in light of your last follow-up with me. I have said before and will again that I believe that for the sake of the honest and respectful arguments you claim to support, that you should seriously re-evaluate your approach.
Once again, I cannot answer for every person with whom I share any viewpoint. Nor do I ask you too. All I ask, and continue to ask, is for you to recognize that you engaged in a behaviour that is quite objectively reprehensible, dishonest, at odds with what you are trying to achieve in your desire for rational, evidence-based discussion, and that spreading misinformation as you did comes from the toolbox of the very dishonest, power hungry pundits, entertainers and politicians, that you rail against.
I shall continue to ‘attack’ dishonesty and deceit, no matter who perpetrates it and liberals are no more innocent of this than conservatives are. I shall continue to argue that ‘ends justify the means’ is not an acceptable ethical perspective when it comes to how we share the ideas which will shape democracy and governance. I will continue to argue that representative democracy demands honest portrayal of the facts. I will continue to attempt to hold you that standard, myself to that standard, and the politicians I both agree with and disagree with to that standard of honest discussion of evidence. I do not accept that deceit which is simply “peaceful and non-physically destructive” is morally acceptable (neither do many courts of law! Has it occurred to you that if a Doctor by the name you used did exist working in the field you mention, continuing to spread the blurb you originally wrong on this site might justify a case of liable against you despite the fact you could easily claim you were peace and not physically harming them? That at very least should help you to see why your initial behaviour here was not defensible in a purely objective sense.)
I do hope you’ll continue to use this site, albeit in a honest fashion. Diverse, literate views are a great thing for those seeking advice from us. However, I’m probably not going to respond to another ‘non-advice’ question in my inbox again. That is against the rules of the site and we could both get banned for using questions as conversations as we have been doing.
Finally, just so we are totally clear. I am not arguing with you politically. I’m not terribly interested in that discussion with you with you right now. What I am arguing for is the WAY that discussion should take place. What I would appreciate if you would pay attention to is my arguments against your choices and behaviour used to promote your ideology in your initial post. I firmly believe it was inappropriate, and whatever our beliefs, we should all endeavour to behave with intellectual honesty.
]
More Questions: |