Wow; I thought that “I’ll stop eating meat when animals have civilization” was the most ignorant thing I have ever heard, but I have a new challenger…
“First, please skip the “equal rights” bit. [Gays] have the same rights as anyone else. Marry someone of the opposite sex and you get those rights. –Anonymous Religious Zealot/Bigot
Wow! I mean, just…wow! What else is there to say? Ignorance is mighty powerful!
Really?
Yeah, really.
Why? You disagree?
“Once you make a comment as stupid, hateful, ignorant, and immoral as the one above I am done with you…”
Do you think it is moral and smart to provide such a quote without any further context? Could you please provide a link to the comment thread this came from so that your readers can judge for themselves if they think the comment is as bad as you claim it to be.
Actually I do, since there is no context (perhaps besides that of a bad joke) where that comment could be interpreted as anything other than offensive. If you can’t see that then you need to have your intuitions checked, as you may be part of the problem…but since you are having difficulty, the original discussion occured here and the context is clearly one where I assert that gay couples are being denied a right that all persons deserve and the ARZ/B says the above…got it?
“Actually I do, since there is no context (perhaps besides that of a bad joke) where that comment could be interpreted as anything other than offensive.”
If you were to write the following sentence:
“Hitler thought, “the extermination of the Jewish race is a positive good.”
And I quoted you on my blog, saying:
Richard stated, “the extermination of the Jewish race is a positive good.”
Would that be moral? Obviously that is an extreme example, but the point is simply that if you fail to provide any clue as to the context it would be irresponsible of me to assume that one or two sentences represents the sum total of any individuals argument. Especially when your response to their quote is so visceral to begin with. When it is so simple to link back to the context of the quote (BTW: the link comes up as a 404 error) it makes no sense not to provide the information. Hyperlinks certainly do make arguments and debates so much easier- reducing the load of library visits required in most discussions.
“If you can’t see that then you need to have your intuitions checked.””
Please don’t lob insults at me simply because you failed to provide what might be reasonably expected. I did a post not too long ago about what the folks over the the Daily Kos were saying about Tony Snow’s passing. I made sure to provide a proper link to all those quoted. Doing otherwise implies you don’t trust your readers to agree with your assessment- and it is much easier to obtain agreement when you paint an adversary in an unfavorable light with sparse quotes and hyperbole.
“got it?”
Yes, I’ve seen the argument many times before on many different blogs. I got it.
“it makes no sense not to provide the information.”
Sorry, I don’t feed trolls. People who say such ridiculous things hsould be ignored not encouraged.
“the point is simply that if you fail to provide any clue as to the context it would be irresponsible of me to assume that one or two sentences represents the sum total of any individuals argument.”
Yes, I agree that if someone did that that would be bad. I assure you that the quote fully represent the position of the Anonymous Religious Zealot/Bigot. I have completely and reliably specified the context. I asserted that gays lacking rights that the rest of us have and ARZ/B said the quote. There were other things that thins person said but not on this issue. Of course, if you don’t want to take my word for it, then you have no business here anyway.
“Please don’t lob insults at me simply because you failed to provide what might be reasonably expected.”
I didn’t fail to do anything…this is my blog and I’ll run it the way I see fit. If you don’t like it, start your own blog and run it your way. It is clear that this person is in the business of denying a group of persons their rigts and on top of that, as if that weren’t bad enough, does so in a glib way that reveals a true lack of character and moral fiber. I don’t need to take anything out of context or use ‘sparse quotes’
I got it.
Good.
Look, I am all for reasoned discussion about this issue, that why I wrote the post in the first place. What I am not for is the bald-faced, glib, denial that there is a rights issue here. Especially when it is given without argument. If you have some argument as to why gays should be denied this very basic human right I will glad to refute it but if all you want to do is make unfounded, ignorant, hateful remarcks that dismiss the suffering of a whole group of people you will have to do it somewhere else.
My “Really?” was in response to the claim that Mr. Gay-basher would spam commenters. I was just testing that claim (which you appear to have removed). He did get in touch with me, but it seemed to be an honest attempt to defend himself, not spam. I haven’t read enough of your battle to take a side, although I suspect that I am ideologically in Richard’s corner.
Hi Daniel,
Sorry for misinterpreting your ‘really’ and thanks for the update.
All posts [ -> ]
François Kammerer joins me once again to help me finally understand Illusionism as we discuss his new book, The House… Read more.
Change my mind I have long thought that there is something deeply anti-scientific about the way that certain people argue… Read more.
I was recently asked to give a talk on higher-order theories to Google DeepMind. I was all set to give… Read more.
Leave a Reply