SUPARUKUSU!____________________(Sparks)

[Scatty]

+1 post

There are going to be a stream of quotes of this post now.

good.

 

good

Please don't slash.

 

 

It's not because I'm freakin' "protect the children" as many people are' date=' it's just that I discriminate gay people.

[/quote']

 

Yaoi's not just for gay people.

Even I like yaoi, and I think we're living in an -eff-ed up society if yaoi is being asociated with being gay.

 

I didn't say yaoi's for gay people (it's actually somewhat for girls) I said it's gay and I'm a freakin' racist that hates gay people almost as much as I hate Christians.

[TechnoDoomedOne]

isnt yaoi' date=' by definition, gay male hentai?

[/quote']

 

By definition, yes it is.

 

I didn't say yaoi's for gay people (it's actually somewhat for girls) I said it's gay and I'm a freakin' racist that hates gay people almost as much as I hate Christians.

 

I think that you are such a bigot. Also, being proud of your racism isn't a good sign either.

[Tronta]

technically, by being so intolerant of his intolerance, you're just as bad of a bigot.

 

who died and magically declared that racism is bad? define 'bad'.

 

and for that matter, being proud of who you are and what you believe in is generally seen as a good thing. it promotes a stable, healthy psyche, raises self esteem all around, and gives him a stronger will. outwardly it even reflects a much more confident person, which is generally seen as attractive to women and desirable to employers and friends.

 

just because you and most of the modern world disagrees with his idiotic views doesnt mean you can be intolerant of them, or else you're forsaking those same modern views in hypocrisy.

 

/devil's advocate

[TechnoDoomedOne]

Philosophy doesn't work on discussing tolerance and/or human rights: there's nothing possible as to a non-bounded tolerance, because tolerance and moral are not natural gifts. We, as a society, have worked to create the moral rules and to promote tolerance, and as such, tolerance and moral rules are imperfect by nature. If we were just: "you're as right as me" for just everything, chaos would reign everywhere because everybody would do what they wanted because, hey, it isn't bad. There is a need to put bounds into the actions of human beings, and to create a "this is good and this is bad" list to mantain order.

 

No human is superior to anybody else. I've been taught to be tolerant, but we should never go so far as to tolerate intolerance. Defending intolerance by saying tolerance is the same is just not going on any side, and that means ending in the total chaos that I stated above, since you can't be intolerant having tolerance, and you can't be tolerant if you play devil's advocate on intolerance. Tolerance isn't just tolerating people and their opinions, but to fight (or simply not allow) intolerance as well.

[Tronta]

so you only tolerate some things.

 

race, sexuality, religion and ideology on the condition that it doesnt conflict with yours. right?

 

tolerance has nothing to do with fighting intolerance. and fighting anything goes against the very principle of tolerance. essentially what you believe, much like your opponent over there, is that you are right and your way is the right way because you've been told your whole life that it is so. oh, and that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

 

chaos would truly reign if this type of argument were allowed to proliferate and gain legitimacy, however this is why those in power arbitrarily declare what is right and wrong. they gloss over contradictory evidence and pull as much support for their causes as they can from hearsay and pseudoscience. every power in history has done it. and it works. people like you turn around and spout the views you've been taught aggressively at others, and oppressed minorities form. some rise up and try to overthrow the powers, some are cleansed from society by means of reeducation or simple genocide. all are persecuted though. by people like you.

 

by the tolerance philosophy, everyone deserves to not be persecuted based on anything whatsoever. in fact, in a tolerant society, there would be no persecution of any kind anywhere for any reason. because people wouldn't have a reason to persecute. murderers and gays would walk hand in hand down the path of burning buildings from the anarchy that would ensue. of course theoretically in such a utopia there would be no crime, because along with perfect tolerance would likely come such sage wisdom as to eliminate the need and desire for most criminal activities.

 

the point is, if you're going to get mad at him for hating the gays, don't try and use some perfect ideal like 'tolerance' to defend your viewpoint. he has every right to be intolerant as the gays do to pack fudge. it isn't his fault he was probably raised on bigotry or traumatized at some point by the victims of what are now his prejudices. or maybe he's just overcompensating for his own homosexual tendencies. who cares? stop beating up the guy for what he believes in. if he wants to be intolerant then you have no right to tell him to stop, unless, of course, you want to accept the fact that you, too, are human and filled with prejudices.

[TechnoDoomedOne]

I really try to be tolerant with everything, except just for bigotry.

 

Everybody has the same rights. If you think that's just for political issues and that this whole human rights and more rules may change, that's your own point of view. I do not deny that as a truth, because it is, but I still believe that not everybody cares nothing about everybody and that good people with good intentions exist.

 

Anarchy is inviable. There must be a social order, there must be laws, and there must be moral rules. The concept of "good" and "evil" are needed, because utopia doesn't exist. The most fair system that I know is that EVERYBODY has the same rights, and as such, I will defend that system.

 

I ain't going to go and kill or persecute people that do not think like me and force them my opinion neither, and I haven't done that. In fact, I was simply answering Scatty's post with a comment of my own about my own thinking that he is a bigot. If everyone has the same freedom, being intolerant about a person or collective is going against that. As far as I am concerned, if someone violates the system, he/she has no right to be protected by it because he/she does not believe in the system either. (Think of it like a social contract)

 

So, yeah, I may be a bigot too by that principle. Also, take note that I'm not stating that my point of view is the correct one, as there is no such a thing if you view it by the philosophist side of the question.

 

So... he has the right to hate and say to he hates gays, and I also have the right to hate him for it or to answer him back. So what about stopping this brainfucking argument, please? Everybody will be happier, I know it.

[RyanAtlus]

I r now a succesfull troll?

[Guest Delinquent Girl NiAtSoFi]

Tronta should teach college philosophy. I'd take that class every semester.

 

OT: Sparks is OP'd. It makes Beaver Warrior look like a fair play.

[Tronta]

as long as you understand that you can't wave around the banner of tolerance to justify your arguments when they fly against that selfsame banner, then yea, we can stop the argument.

 

although i would to point out that you just argued that prisoners shouldn't have rights. so i can just go to a womens prison and viciously sate my sexual desires on the inmates, right? because they violated the social contract they never signed to begin with? then i can go release some men from the men's prison and hunt them down with an elephant gun. cuz fuckit, they don't have rights! then i can get some children from the juvenile detention center, and use them as labor/sex slaves!

man, this system rules.

[Overlord Lucan]

as long as you understand that you can't wave around the banner of tolerance to justify your arguments when they fly against that selfsame banner' date=' then yea, we can stop the argument.

 

although i would to point out that you just argued that prisoners shouldn't have rights. so i can just go to a womens prison and viciously sate my sexual desires on the inmates, right? because they violated the social contract they never signed to begin with? then i can go release some men from the men's prison and hunt them down with an elephant gun. cuz fuckit, they don't have rights! then i can get some children from the juvenile detention center, and use them as labor/sex slaves!

man, this system rules.

[/quote']

 

There's something wrong with that system; if only I could put my finger on it

[Tronta]

yeah, it needs more death race.

[Overlord Lucan]

Ahh thats it, it needs the possiblity of gaining back your rights by preforming extremely dangerous stunts for public amusement.

[Tronta]

yup.

[TechnoDoomedOne]

You're just putting every single comment I said out of context by making it a universal rule so you could slap that on my face. If you find that moral rules are stupid or defiable, then fine. Nevertheless, I wasn't bothering you to start on, so I don't know why are you so, so concerned.

 

Also, I ain't the only one to think the way I commented. I was just stating what it's the nowadays modern way of thinking. And you know how it works. I am just being a little aggressive and maybe I have posted some things that I didn't specify and that may have sound tyranical, but that wasn't the point. (if it did seem that way I apologize. Really.) However, I did because you were are being aggressive too by putting things out of context.

 

So, to sum it up, if you don't like the modern way of thinking about being tolerant and fighting intolerance, then it's your opinion. I have put my points and you have put yours, so let's end this meaningless discussion just for once and for all, because fighting my opinion: A) It's not going to change it, you're just a name on my browser; B) It's not going to do anything about your disagreement with the overall modern opinion.

[The Sacred Ninja]

lolYCM

[Guest Delinquent Girl NiAtSoFi]

You're just putting every single comment I said out of context

 

Welcome to the Internet.

[TechnoDoomedOne]

You're just putting every single comment I said out of context

 

Welcome to the Internet.

 

Yes, I know.

 

And I know that I'm only feeding the troll, I do not know why I bother. Maybe because I'm too naive.

[Tronta]

/om nom

 

i am blowing some things out of proportion, fine.

 

and you are in sync with the modern way of thinking.

 

that doesn't mean the modern way of thinking isn't stupid and hypocritical :P

and the more people who i make understand that, the better the chance that they won't pass on stupid, hypocritical values to their kids. then one day the whole world will live in perfect harmony.

 

fighting for world peace, yo.

[TechnoDoomedOne]

OK. Do we call it even, then?

[.dek]

oh plz. sparks iz an amazeing cardz. exceptz when your opponent uses horriblez cards liek solum judgez cuz then they dont loose as much. oh well. studip nobs.

 

OT:

MY DECK DOESN'T SUCK.

Quick-Play Spell

Activate only while you have any combination of "Larvae Moth", "Shapesnatch", and "Sparks" on your hand, field, or graveyard that adds up to 5 cards and includes at least one of each. You win at life the duel.

[Sephiroth_The_Legend]

Pro-Tip:

 

Play Polymerization to fuse 3 "Sparks" together.

Makes a spell card called "Super Mega Awesome Happy Fire Storm"

 

 

OT:

 

Classic :D

[RyanAtlus]

I haz found a new way to win at Life.

 

1) Reduce the opponent's LP to 200 or less.

2) Make sure the opponent has a face-down Solemn.

3) LOL as your opponent Solemns a Sparks.

[Brinolovania]

...I <3 this thread.

 

OT:This card is the best, you must always run it!

[Sephiroth_The_Legend]

I haz found a new way to win at Life.

 

1) Reduce the opponent's LP to 200 or less.

2) Make sure the opponent has a face-down Solemn.

3) LOL as your opponent Solemns a Sparks.

 

4) Summon Raging Flame Sprite and attack directly for game.

[Scatty]

Cookies