Of course, saying that "I disagree with doing (or not doing) X action" equates to "I hate people who take (or don't take) X action," is a claim that requires hard evidence, of a standard beyond personal assumptions about motivations or how that person actually feels about others and treats them in real life, to back it up. Said equation cannot be made without hard evidence simply to shut up someone that one disagrees with.
I don't want to do the Lohlunat festival because I don't care for the horgh'ans or the festival's backstory. I don't want to participate in an alien bacchinalia and I choose to sit it out and its rewards, even if what we are seeing is the tamer part of it. Does not mean I hate Cryptic, or players who play the event. If they want to do it, it's not up to me to tell them not to. I just do not want a part in it. But I guess I am a bad person.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Of course, saying that "I disagree with doing (or not doing) X action" equates to "I hate people who take (or don't take) X action," is a claim that requires hard evidence, of a standard beyond personal assumptions about motivations or how that person actually feels about others and treats them in real life, to back it up. Said equation cannot be made without hard evidence simply to shut up someone that one disagrees with.
I don't want to do the Lohlunat festival because I don't care for the horgh'ans or the festival's backstory. I don't want to participate in an alien bacchinalia and I choose to sit it out and its rewards, even if what we are seeing is the tamer part of it. Does not mean I hate Cryptic, or players who play the event. I just do not want a part in it. But I guess I am a bad person.
That comparison is disingenuous.
"Disagreeing" with the summer festival means avoiding an in-game event based on a fictional culture.
"Disagreeing" with homosexuality means dismissing as inferior, wicked, or sinful people's lives, families, and loves. It is literally impossible to "love the sinner and hate the sin" when it comes to homosexuality, because the "sin" is so inherent to every part of their life. It means that you believe their most important, intimate relationships - their romantic lives, their marriages, the happiness they feel when they come home after a long day away from those they most want to be near - are wrong, are evil, are an offense to God.
If I were to tell you that your love or your marriage was sinful, evil, offesive to God, I deeply hope you would be angry. I deeply hope you would take it personally, because I hope you are a person to whom love and marriage ARE personal.
That is what you are telling me when you say you "disagree" with homosexuality. That my love and my bed are offensive to a god who you and I share. You can see why I might find that the slightesy bit offensive?
If I were to tell you that your love or your marriage was sinful, evil, offesive to God, I deeply hope you would be angry. I deeply hope you would take it personally, because I hope you are a person to whom love and marriage ARE personal.
I wouldn't be angry. I'd just note that you were from a different religion than mine, and take you off my party invite list because you'd be a real downer if you came.
Then I wouldn't give you a second thought, unless you went all ISIS about it.
I certainly don't recall myself going around calling people wicked for being homosexual just because I disagree with them. Heck..I have quite a few homosexual friends..one of which I have known my whole life and watched me grow up.
Which side? That the person doing the disagreeing is devaluing people's families, or that the person who's being disagreed with's family is being devalued?
If it's the first... well, the author is dead. If you can't explain your distaste of homosexuality in a way that makes clear that you still see same-sex couples' love and family as valid, then what you say - the words coming out of your mouth - are going to be offensive. And, given that you are calling the core formation of that love sinful or shameful, you've got an uphill rhetorical climb.
If it's the second, it doesn't matter. You're dismissing my family. You're dismissing millions of families like mine. That you're not offending every single TRIBBLE person everywhere doesn't change that.
I don't see people getting offended when those who do not support it get disagreed with. Please explain why it is an issue for you while it is not for others?
I wouldn't be angry. I'd just note that you were from a different religion than mine, and take you off my party invite list because you'd be a real downer if you came.
Then I wouldn't give you a second thought, unless you went all ISIS about it.
Pretty much this here: as long as the person who said it left it at that and did not disrupt what I was doing or violate stalking/harassment laws in the process, then that's the end of that. Oh well, that's their personal issue. They're free to say it and do what they want in their area, I am free to continue doing as I want, as long as we do not cross into each other's turf to be a disruption to the other.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Three questions for anyone who cares to answer them
Question 1: If you don't think being homosexual is inferior, wicked or sinful, then what exactly are you 'disagreeing' with? Please be clear and precise. Special attention will be paid to mentions of revulsion or suggestions that the activity you designate as not inferior/wicked/sinful activity should be hidden from view or avoided or left out of fiction you happen to like.
Question 2: Does anyone really believe that a whole culture (or even very loud parts of it) talking about how sinful, wicked or repulsive a group of people are doesn't lead to more violence against them? Really? Because if you believe that, go and look up the murder stats for homosexual individuals compared to heterosexual. Or transgender individuals compared to cisgender. Or blacks or Latinos compared to white.
Go on. I'll wait. And when you're done, hopefully you can accept that sick feeling in your stomach as moral horror instead of trying to attack the statistics as invalid.
Question 3: If I were to say "I don't hate black people, I have black friends. I just don't want to see them in fiction because I disagree with their lifestyle," how would that sound?
I think everyone here is smart enough to hear what's really being said in a remark like that.
And what IS your religion, the major ones that are pretty old tend to have a dim view of it.
I'm what at used to be considered mainstream American Protestant. Independent (i.e. not a member of any group larger than a single church) Baptist going by my church membership.
Plus in religion no matter how they cut it, its the Highlander rule "THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE", religious dogma is serious and if you think for a second the Roman Catholics have forgot about you reformist heretics ...
The absolute outer edge of my reaction for this sort of thing is defined by Matthew 10.
In short, the most I can do (after stating my faith based opinion) is walk away. I can't punish, I can't harm, I can't rage. All I can do is walk away and leave it for God to deal with as he will.
Only extremists go and try to murder people for sexuality/race/religion, etc. That seems to escape the minds of many on here.
And the less extreme - those unwilling to go to the lengths the extremists do - provide moral and rhetorical cover to those extremists.
I am transgender, and am thankful every day that I am not a straight transgender woman. Why? Because of the trans panic defense.
It goes like this: a trans woman meets a man she's interested in, or simply attracts the attention of a man by being in his space. The man then learns that she is trans.
Then, in a panic over being perceived as TRIBBLE, he murders her.
Then he is arrested, tried, and found not guilty. Because the jury feels that "I was attracted to someone I came to perceive as male" is a sufficiently traumatic experience that it excuses murder.
This... is not rare. Because beliefs don't happen in a vacuum - everything we do is educated by our beliefs. And that means, for LGBT folks (especially the T part), we die. We are discriminated against in ways big and small, and we die.
And that doesn't count the vast number of us (more than half of trans women!) who, after spending years or decades being told people "disagree" with who we are, attempt suicide.
Because the jury feels that "I was attracted to someone I came to perceive as male" is a sufficiently traumatic experience that it excuses murder.
That has to be the worst excuse for a murderer I have ever heard and really sounds like a hyperbole.
But regardless of the Defense's plea, if there was enough evidence to prove someone was a cold blooded killer and a jury let them go, then the jury is stupid.
Because the jury feels that "I was attracted to someone I came to perceive as male" is a sufficiently traumatic experience that it excuses murder.
That has to be the worst excuse for a murderer I have ever heard and really sounds like a hyperbole.
But regardless of the Defense's plea, if there was enough evidence to prove someone was a cold blooded killer and a jury let them go, then the jury is stupid.
As I said, it's not uncommon. It's called the trans panic defense. The vast bulk of states allow it, and when it's attempted it's usually successful.
Not if I'm on that jury. I'd be ready to hang the perp for that, without hesitation. Victim-blame of any sort as a "criminal defense" generally makes me ready to advocate harsher punishment than I would for the crime itself.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
If someone went and murdered another because they were TRIBBLE/trans, that person is either evil or is a psychopath, again extremism. \
You're half right: if someone goes and MURDERS someone else, then they are evil or a psychopath. The reason they did it doesn't actually matter, as far as MURDER goes. Note that MURDER is not the same thing as "kill", by law and by definition.
Juries can't be punished for giving the wrong verdict.
However, the "TRIBBLE Panic Defense" is quickly being thrown out of the legal system as pseudo-science because there is no hard evidence to back up 'temporary insanity' when it comes to assault or murder against someone LGBT.
California became the first state to ban the defense entirely. Countries around the world are making similar measures.
I would not care even if you are a rubber duck, did I ask about that? did anyone here asked about that?
You dont even know my gender, hell I doubt you even know what country I am from yet people think its quite alright to go on about their PERSONAL DETAILS yet they never post things that would be useful, like their account numbers and the PIN numbers or their social security numbers ... no, its always stuff like this.
I
DONT
CARE
While everyone else is looking up the stats I mentioned earlier, why don't you go up and look up the word privilege? Try "Derailing for Dummies" as a good starting point. Getting to not care about other people's personal details or pretend they're irrelevant is a wonderful example.
At any rate, I'd love to see some answers to Razor's questions up there.
Question 1:
Not directed at me as I consider it sinful due to strongly held religious belief.
Question 2:
One answer, one exception to note.
First Answer: If it does, it *shouldn't* as according to my religious belief on the matter I don't have the right to resort to violence. I cannot be held accountable for those who don't share my beliefs.
Second Answer: Bad use of stats, don't use totals, it leaves out important elements- go back and remove sub-culture on sub-culture violence, also remove those that were involved in criminal activity that had an influence on the final event. Then get back to me.
It's amazing how much harm people do to their own kind in a way. But in another, it's expected. We travel in certain circles and if harm is to befall one, it generally comes from the circles one travels in. It's like most kids that are taken, are taken by family members.
Question 3:
One answer, one exception to note.
Answer: I wouldn't say such a thing
Second: It's Strawman question.
Race <> One's sexual choices and more importantly how one frames one sexual choices (this latter statement is important for those who think they lack free will in deciding who they'll have sex with).
1: Religious practice. Civil liberty should permit divided opinions in that regard. Others do not practice as I do. That is their civil right.
2: If anyone crosses into hate, into violence, into cruelty, they will get my objections and my wrath. If one claims the victim is to blame for a crime against them (any reason excepting REAL self-defense, not "I freaked out because someone is not like me"), they should be punished worse. I have in the past and will continue to speak against this. I want discriminatory crime to touch no one of any type.
3: Agreed on the strawman. Anyway, my children wouldn't be playing STO, due most to zone chat and other player behavior problems: hypersexualized toons, actions simulating vulgar public conduct in game (I don't need to describe it, we all know what it is), and inappropriate behavior to those with female toons.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Question 1:
Not directed at me as I consider it sinful due to strongly held religious belief.
Question 2:
One answer, one exception to note.
First Answer: If it does, it *shouldn't* as according to my religious belief on the matter I don't have the right to resort to violence. I cannot be held accountable for those who don't share my beliefs.
Second Answer: Bad use of stats, don't use totals, it leaves out important elements- go back and remove sub-culture on sub-culture violence, also remove those that were involved in criminal activity that had an influence on the final event. Then get back to me.
It's amazing how much harm people do to their own kind in a way. But in another, it's expected. We travel in certain circles and if harm is to befall one, it generally comes from the circles one travels in. It's like most kids that are taken, are taken by family members.
Question 3:
One answer, one exception to note.
Answer: I wouldn't say such a thing
Second: It's Strawman question.
Race <> One's sexual choices and more importantly how one frames one sexual choices (this latter statement is important for those who think they lack free will in deciding who they'll have sex with).
I'll note that it's almost always straight folks who reduce these conversations to being about "sexual choice," as though sex is all that's important. Make it out to be about sex instead of love and family and life.
On your second... half of all hate crimes target trans people. We make up less than 1% of the population. Most of those target trans women of color, but of white people white trans women are orders of magnitude more likely to be the victims of murder than anyone else. Your argument that statistics are being used badly doesn't pan out.
On 3... yeah, I've got nothing. If you look at my family and see only "sexual choices," you live in such a different universe from mine that I'm amazed we share a language.
Race <> One's sexual choices and more importantly how one frames one sexual choices (this latter statement is important for those who think they lack free will in deciding who they'll have sex with).
Who mentioned choice? The questions were about TRIBBLE people. Or are you under the impression that's somehow a choice?
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Comments
I don't want to do the Lohlunat festival because I don't care for the horgh'ans or the festival's backstory. I don't want to participate in an alien bacchinalia and I choose to sit it out and its rewards, even if what we are seeing is the tamer part of it. Does not mean I hate Cryptic, or players who play the event. If they want to do it, it's not up to me to tell them not to. I just do not want a part in it. But I guess I am a bad person.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
"Disagreeing" with the summer festival means avoiding an in-game event based on a fictional culture.
"Disagreeing" with homosexuality means dismissing as inferior, wicked, or sinful people's lives, families, and loves. It is literally impossible to "love the sinner and hate the sin" when it comes to homosexuality, because the "sin" is so inherent to every part of their life. It means that you believe their most important, intimate relationships - their romantic lives, their marriages, the happiness they feel when they come home after a long day away from those they most want to be near - are wrong, are evil, are an offense to God.
If I were to tell you that your love or your marriage was sinful, evil, offesive to God, I deeply hope you would be angry. I deeply hope you would take it personally, because I hope you are a person to whom love and marriage ARE personal.
That is what you are telling me when you say you "disagree" with homosexuality. That my love and my bed are offensive to a god who you and I share. You can see why I might find that the slightesy bit offensive?
I wouldn't be angry. I'd just note that you were from a different religion than mine, and take you off my party invite list because you'd be a real downer if you came.
Then I wouldn't give you a second thought, unless you went all ISIS about it.
I certainly don't recall myself going around calling people wicked for being homosexual just because I disagree with them. Heck..I have quite a few homosexual friends..one of which I have known my whole life and watched me grow up.
We have had zero problems.
Which side? That the person doing the disagreeing is devaluing people's families, or that the person who's being disagreed with's family is being devalued?
If it's the first... well, the author is dead. If you can't explain your distaste of homosexuality in a way that makes clear that you still see same-sex couples' love and family as valid, then what you say - the words coming out of your mouth - are going to be offensive. And, given that you are calling the core formation of that love sinful or shameful, you've got an uphill rhetorical climb.
If it's the second, it doesn't matter. You're dismissing my family. You're dismissing millions of families like mine. That you're not offending every single TRIBBLE person everywhere doesn't change that.
Pretty much this here: as long as the person who said it left it at that and did not disrupt what I was doing or violate stalking/harassment laws in the process, then that's the end of that. Oh well, that's their personal issue. They're free to say it and do what they want in their area, I am free to continue doing as I want, as long as we do not cross into each other's turf to be a disruption to the other.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Question 1: If you don't think being homosexual is inferior, wicked or sinful, then what exactly are you 'disagreeing' with? Please be clear and precise. Special attention will be paid to mentions of revulsion or suggestions that the activity you designate as not inferior/wicked/sinful activity should be hidden from view or avoided or left out of fiction you happen to like.
Question 2: Does anyone really believe that a whole culture (or even very loud parts of it) talking about how sinful, wicked or repulsive a group of people are doesn't lead to more violence against them? Really? Because if you believe that, go and look up the murder stats for homosexual individuals compared to heterosexual. Or transgender individuals compared to cisgender. Or blacks or Latinos compared to white.
Go on. I'll wait. And when you're done, hopefully you can accept that sick feeling in your stomach as moral horror instead of trying to attack the statistics as invalid.
Question 3: If I were to say "I don't hate black people, I have black friends. I just don't want to see them in fiction because I disagree with their lifestyle," how would that sound?
I think everyone here is smart enough to hear what's really being said in a remark like that.
Unfortunately that is what war is all about. Only "extremists" murder each other for land/money/etc.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
I'm what at used to be considered mainstream American Protestant. Independent (i.e. not a member of any group larger than a single church) Baptist going by my church membership.
The absolute outer edge of my reaction for this sort of thing is defined by Matthew 10.
In short, the most I can do (after stating my faith based opinion) is walk away. I can't punish, I can't harm, I can't rage. All I can do is walk away and leave it for God to deal with as he will.
And the less extreme - those unwilling to go to the lengths the extremists do - provide moral and rhetorical cover to those extremists.
I am transgender, and am thankful every day that I am not a straight transgender woman. Why? Because of the trans panic defense.
It goes like this: a trans woman meets a man she's interested in, or simply attracts the attention of a man by being in his space. The man then learns that she is trans.
Then, in a panic over being perceived as TRIBBLE, he murders her.
Then he is arrested, tried, and found not guilty. Because the jury feels that "I was attracted to someone I came to perceive as male" is a sufficiently traumatic experience that it excuses murder.
This... is not rare. Because beliefs don't happen in a vacuum - everything we do is educated by our beliefs. And that means, for LGBT folks (especially the T part), we die. We are discriminated against in ways big and small, and we die.
And that doesn't count the vast number of us (more than half of trans women!) who, after spending years or decades being told people "disagree" with who we are, attempt suicide.
And the jury that sets them free?
Because the jury feels that "I was attracted to someone I came to perceive as male" is a sufficiently traumatic experience that it excuses murder.
That has to be the worst excuse for a murderer I have ever heard and really sounds like a hyperbole.
But regardless of the Defense's plea, if there was enough evidence to prove someone was a cold blooded killer and a jury let them go, then the jury is stupid.
As I said, it's not uncommon. It's called the trans panic defense. The vast bulk of states allow it, and when it's attempted it's usually successful.
Not if I'm on that jury. I'd be ready to hang the perp for that, without hesitation. Victim-blame of any sort as a "criminal defense" generally makes me ready to advocate harsher punishment than I would for the crime itself.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
About IDIC - I always thought it was a Vulcan philosophy. You know, the race that can't abide emotions and consider such displays as undignified.
Why don't Vulcans embrace emotions if IDIC is really that important?
(Really! It's just a marketing ploy, and not a very well thought out one at that!)
Only people with an IQ of 0 would listen to such a defense.
You're half right: if someone goes and MURDERS someone else, then they are evil or a psychopath. The reason they did it doesn't actually matter, as far as MURDER goes. Note that MURDER is not the same thing as "kill", by law and by definition.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
Juries can't be punished for giving the wrong verdict.
However, the "TRIBBLE Panic Defense" is quickly being thrown out of the legal system as pseudo-science because there is no hard evidence to back up 'temporary insanity' when it comes to assault or murder against someone LGBT.
California became the first state to ban the defense entirely. Countries around the world are making similar measures.
It just takes time.
While everyone else is looking up the stats I mentioned earlier, why don't you go up and look up the word privilege? Try "Derailing for Dummies" as a good starting point. Getting to not care about other people's personal details or pretend they're irrelevant is a wonderful example.
Education is good for everyone.
Question 1:
Not directed at me as I consider it sinful due to strongly held religious belief.
Question 2:
One answer, one exception to note.
First Answer: If it does, it *shouldn't* as according to my religious belief on the matter I don't have the right to resort to violence. I cannot be held accountable for those who don't share my beliefs.
Second Answer: Bad use of stats, don't use totals, it leaves out important elements- go back and remove sub-culture on sub-culture violence, also remove those that were involved in criminal activity that had an influence on the final event. Then get back to me.
It's amazing how much harm people do to their own kind in a way. But in another, it's expected. We travel in certain circles and if harm is to befall one, it generally comes from the circles one travels in. It's like most kids that are taken, are taken by family members.
Question 3:
One answer, one exception to note.
Answer: I wouldn't say such a thing
Second: It's Strawman question.
Race <> One's sexual choices and more importantly how one frames one sexual choices (this latter statement is important for those who think they lack free will in deciding who they'll have sex with).
2: If anyone crosses into hate, into violence, into cruelty, they will get my objections and my wrath. If one claims the victim is to blame for a crime against them (any reason excepting REAL self-defense, not "I freaked out because someone is not like me"), they should be punished worse. I have in the past and will continue to speak against this. I want discriminatory crime to touch no one of any type.
3: Agreed on the strawman. Anyway, my children wouldn't be playing STO, due most to zone chat and other player behavior problems: hypersexualized toons, actions simulating vulgar public conduct in game (I don't need to describe it, we all know what it is), and inappropriate behavior to those with female toons.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I'll note that it's almost always straight folks who reduce these conversations to being about "sexual choice," as though sex is all that's important. Make it out to be about sex instead of love and family and life.
On your second... half of all hate crimes target trans people. We make up less than 1% of the population. Most of those target trans women of color, but of white people white trans women are orders of magnitude more likely to be the victims of murder than anyone else. Your argument that statistics are being used badly doesn't pan out.
On 3... yeah, I've got nothing. If you look at my family and see only "sexual choices," you live in such a different universe from mine that I'm amazed we share a language.
Who mentioned choice? The questions were about TRIBBLE people. Or are you under the impression that's somehow a choice?
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!