Chocolate Lab For Sale

Knightshade_Dragon
Knightshade_Dragon
6f34f6d73a1c96bbff0feff8a13aea7e.jpg

Too good not to share, wth has our world come to...?

Ron Burke
Editor in Chief
GAMING TREND

Xbox Gamertag: Gaming Trend
PS4 Tag: GamingTrend

Comments

  • Knightshade_Dragon
    Knightshade_Dragon
    GT Manager
    0 RorP about this, think different IM me and I'll bring you up to speed.

    Ron Burke
    Editor in Chief
    GAMING TREND

    Xbox Gamertag: Gaming Trend
    PS4 Tag: GamingTrend

  • Lee
    Lee
    GT Member
    I don't know why anyone cares about this unless they are involved in the NAACP. I am guessing my conservative friends are just looking for any opportunity to attack the left? Posting on a forum that is known for leaning left is nothing short of trolling, as ATB has proved.
  • TiLT
    TiLT
    GT Member
    Looks like this is Eco-Logic's version of account suicide.
  • farley2k
    farley2k
    GT Moderator
    Seems to fall squarly in the nonsense category so this might be a better fit.

    Personally I found it kind of funny but lots of people might feel it was picking a fight.

  • ATB
    ATB
    GT Member
    on 1434656413:

    Posting on a forum that is known for leaning left is nothing short of trolling, as ATB has proved.


    Honestly. If someone feels deep inside they are black, who are we to say they're not black? Just as if a d00d feels deep inside he is a woman, who are we to say they're not a woman? It makes perfect sense.

    Rather than treat the mental disorder (in this case self-hatred and in the other Gender Identity Disorder), we should embrace it it as 'their truth."

    Now we also have the interesting problem of 'agenderism' in which case someone is either both genders or neither. Again, if we are to embrace these types of things instead of try to correct them, let's go all the way. Also for these folks we must appropriately apply the use of 'they/them' rather than him/her or what's probably more spot on 'it'.

    Thus if what's her name 'identifies' as black, then who are we to race shame her and force her to conform? I mean no one should be ashamed of anything they do regardless of how crazy or out of touch with reality it is, right? This is the new normal. There is no normal and no one can be corrected for anything.

    Where am I wrong in this?
  • forgeforsaken
    forgeforsaken
    GT Member
    on 1434666728:

    on 1434656413:

    Posting on a forum that is known for leaning left is nothing short of trolling, as ATB has proved.


    Honestly. If someone feels deep inside they are black, who are we to say they're not black? Just as if a d00d feels deep inside he is a woman, who are we to say they're not a woman? It makes perfect sense.

    Rather than treat the mental disorder (in this case self-hatred and in the other Gender Identity Disorder), we should embrace it it as 'their truth."

    Now we also have the interesting problem of 'agenderism' in which case someone is either both genders or neither. Again, if we are to embrace these types of things instead of try to correct them, let's go all the way. Also for these folks we must appropriately apply the use of 'they/them' rather than him/her or what's probably more spot on 'it'.

    Thus if what's her name 'identifies' as black, then who are we to race shame her and force her to conform? I mean no one should be ashamed of anything they do regardless of how crazy or out of touch with reality it is, right? This is the new normal. There is no normal and no one can be corrected for anything.

    Where am I wrong in this?


    All over the place. You're main assertion is a false equivalency. You're also assuming that things like gender identity, and I'm going to guess sexual preference as well, are treatable. In regards to transgenderism there's still a lot of scientific research in process, but there's already evidence that the transgender brain structure is physically different from the cisgender brain of someone of biologically the same sex. How exactly do you treat that?
  • Andrew Wonser
    Andrew Wonser
    GT Member
    i"m kind of with ATB on this one. I have no problem if someone wants to identify as some other culture or race. I imagine on some message boards, or the seedy parts of reddit, people are calling Rachel a wigger Which infuriates me as much as when other labels, like weebo or sjw, are applied to people. It's all a way to dismiss a person so you can feel big. Though there is nothing that says you have to like it, or accept it, but I would ask that you at least tolerate it.

    I'm going to assume ATB was also being somewhat tongue-in-cheek with a lot of his post. At least I hope so. And yes you can absolutely "fix" a person. Which usually results in their identity being horribly changed or leads to severe depression and usually suicide. Just so we are clear on this I'm 100% against trying to force someone to be something they are not just to fit your narrative of what is normal. Though there is a rabbit hole that this brings up that I would rather not get into.

    This also reminds me of this article from the BBC. People that identify as pure Japanese (Which is ignorant in itself) call her hafu, which she has embraced as a way to deflate the insult. Is she American, Japanese, or black? How about this, she is a person.


    (As an aside I don't agree with the topic move. I know Eco-Logic likes to push it from time to time but while the joke might be groan worthy in it's bad taste in no way do I see it putting forth a R or P agenda. But that's not something I'm going to fight.)
  • Lee
    Lee
    GT Member
    It's very much R&P because the right has made it so. Notice the 2 people who posted jokes about it are both known for being conservatives and one of them were is trying desperately to make some sort of point. I don't think the rest of us care.

    And yes, I agree Eco's was funny, but knowing how the right is up in arms over this, it makes it feel like trolling.
  • Suitably Ironic Moniker
    Suitably Ironic Moniker
    GT Member
    Especially with his disclaimer about how it positively, definitely isn't R&P. Seems disingenuous.
  • Mystic95Z
    Mystic95Z
    GT Member
    Def not r&p considering that Dolezal isnt black, but just pretending to be...
  • Autistic Angel
    Autistic Angel
    GT Member
    The story of Rachel Dolezal is not inherently political. However, the political right has leaped on it like a springboard to advance their mockery of gay and transgendered people. They have employed slippery slope arguments for decades, complaining that if two men enter into a legally binding marriage with all the same rights and protections that a heterosexual couple would enjoy, then all societal norms will collapse forever. They think the idea of a Caucasian woman fabricating evidence to present herself as an African-American fits that narrative.

    The mods predicted Eco-Logic's post would degenerate into thinly veiled LGBT-phobic jabs, and lo and behold:

    on 1434666728:

    Honestly. If someone feels deep inside they are black, who are we to say they're not black? Just as if a d00d feels deep inside he is a woman, who are we to say they're not a woman? It makes perfect sense.

    Rather than treat the mental disorder (in this case self-hatred and in the other Gender Identity Disorder), we should embrace it it as 'their truth."

    Now we also have the interesting problem of 'agenderism' in which case someone is either both genders or neither. Again, if we are to embrace these types of things instead of try to correct them, let's go all the way. Also for these folks we must appropriately apply the use of 'they/them' rather than him/her or what's probably more spot on 'it'.

    Thus if what's her name 'identifies' as black, then who are we to race shame her and force her to conform? I mean no one should be ashamed of anything they do regardless of how crazy or out of touch with reality it is, right? This is the new normal. There is no normal and no one can be corrected for anything.



    This is where the thread was always headed; the only reason Eco-Logic thought to preemptively include a disclaimer was that it was already on his mind. People, as a general rule, do not begin conversations by saying "Hello, I'm not doing anything wrong!" unless they are.

    -Autistic Angel
  • hepcat
    hepcat
    GT Member
    The bolded sections in that quote sum up his prejudicial views perfectly.
  • Harkonis
    Harkonis
    GT Member
    I do find that most people that talk about someone being 'out of touch with reality' are in fact themselves 'out of touch with reality'.
  • Arclight
    Arclight
    GT Member
    Moral absolutes. With all moral issues comes the trench warfare. But without a sense of right and wrong
    you have the start of Anarchy. To think that society would be fine without some sort of moral absolutes
    is a bit like Pollyanna thinking.

    Law of the Jungle. That's what you would degenerate to without Moral Absolutes. Just look around the World
    for proof of that.
    The bullies of this World would run the show.
    Bill Mayer recently said, I find nothing wrong with Ashley Maddison, and people who use the service.(a place to hook up with other married individuals with the sole purpose of cheating on their spouses)
    What happened to monogamy? Its a filthy word to many.
    To love, cherish and be faithful. To honor above yourself the person you're married to. Marriage is a covenant between to agreeing parties. It's vow's or promises to the other that they will never cheat,
    never purposely hurt them.
    In the Christian belief of Marriage the Bible states" And the two shall become one. Talking about Marriage. For better or worse. sickness or in health.etc.

    commitment isn't meant to be broken down the road when you've grown tired of your covenant marriage.

    But, back to moral absolutes. Who writes the new laws and standards once all Moral absolutes are destroyed?
    He who has the biggest stick.

    Moral Absolutes can give us a sense of deep security, and a respect for others in society. What are you going to teach your children? What's right, what's wrong?
    I think you'll find a lot of moral issues being addressed with raising your children. They will ask the questions, don't worry about that. :nod:
    What would be your response? I will venture a guess you will give them the same answers your parents gave you. Because they make sense in a society that isn't geared
    to the individual, and the law of the Jungle.


  • Gratch
    Gratch
    GT Member
    I'm confused...is it the institution of marriage that you're saying is the moral absolute? Monogamy? Maintaining marriage vows? I'm not sure what your point is. :~
  • Arclight
    Arclight
    GT Member
    Moral Absolutes. That is all. I read a few remarks on it, and in the season of elections, I thought it fit

    I use marriage as an example, not the topic of my reply.

    And I mentioned Bill Mayer because he seems to be the voice of those who think Moral absolutes is a political issue.
    And also, I'm one who thinks spirituality is best served out of politics.

    This generation is showing us the results of a society leaning towards, do what feels good to you.
    The entertainment industry has now become the moral standard by which most of North American
    youths adhere to.




  • Lee
    Lee
    GT Member
    Why does GTs R&P thread always attract the crazies?

    And who is Bill Mayer, and why does he speak for us?

    And WTF does any of this have to with a woman pretending to be black?
  • Ironrod
    Ironrod
    GT Member
    on 1441552618:

    And who is Bill Mayer, and why does he speak for us?


    He probably means Bill Maher: Comedian, talk show host, professed atheist, and sometime-douchebag. Provocation is his stock in trade.
  • Gratch
    Gratch
    GT Member
    I think you're saying that moral absolutes are required in order for society to function . Is that correct?

    If so, I'd ask a follow-up question. Who decides what is considered a moral "absolute"? Who gets to define them? A church? The Bible? Law? Common sense? Because I imagine that you'll find wildly differing opinions on what constitutes all of the above, which - by definition - invalidates something as an "absolute".

    And I'd elevate Maher to "always douchebag" status, even though I often agree with him.
  • Lee
    Lee
    GT Member
    on 1441553823:

    If so, I'd ask a follow-up question. Who decides what is considered a moral "absolute"? Who gets to define them? A church? The Bible? Law? Common sense? Because I imagine that you'll find wildly differing opinions on what constitutes all of the above, which - by definition invalidates something as an "absolute".


    You know the answer to that. Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior is the only true choice. Everyone else is a sinner and will be punished in hell for their hedonistic ways. Let Arclight show us the path...

    Oh, and don't watch Bill Mayer.
  • Gratch
    Gratch
    GT Member
    Perhaps, but I'm trying to do a better job of understanding other's viewpoints. That's not to say I will agree with them (I most likely won't), but I've become much more interested lately about what "makes people tick" and why they think what they do, especially where politics and/or religion is involved.

    Had a situation recently where an assumption about someone on my end led to a very unpleasant and awkward interaction...trying to avoid repeating that where I can. :)
  • Lee
    Lee
    GT Member
    on 1441554875:

    Perhaps, but I'm trying to do a better job of understanding other's viewpoints. That's not to say I will agree with them (I most likely won't), but I've become much more interested lately about what "makes people tick" and why they think what they do, especially where politics and/or religion is involved.

    Had a situation recently where an assumption about someone on my end led to a very unpleasant and awkward interaction...trying to avoid repeating that where I can. :)



    Fair enough, but we have been down this road with Arclight a few times now. He comes and makes an incoherent preachy post and then gets pissed off that no one takes him seriously and how he's leaving GT forever. Wash and repeat.
  • Ironrod
    Ironrod
    GT Member
    on 1441553823:

    I think you're saying that moral absolutes are required in order for society to function . Is that correct?

    If so, I'd ask a follow-up question. Who decides what is considered a moral "absolute"? Who gets to define them? A church? The Bible? Law? Common sense? Because I imagine that you'll find wildly differing opinions on what constitutes all of the above, which - by definition - invalidates something as an "absolute".

    And I'd elevate Maher to "always douchebag" status, even though I often agree with him.


    Heh. I was being polite. I often find Maher personally objectionable despite being occasionally funny and usually right. Dunno if that's just his schtick or who he really is, but I don't think I'd want to go out for beers with him.

    You know who else lives by moral absolutes? ISIS! I'll bet their absolutes and Arclight's absolutes don't overlap very much. Moral absolutes are relative.

    That said, a handful of prohibitions, such as those against murder and incest, are remarkably widespread across cultures and history. Regardless of what authority laid them down, they persist because they helped our species survive and our societies cohere.

    IDK what any of this has to do with chocolate labs though. Maybe we're just trying to actually get a P&R thread to page 2 before it degrades into name-calling?
  • Gratch
    Gratch
    GT Member
    on 1441579638:

    on 1441553823:

    I think you're saying that moral absolutes are required in order for society to function . Is that correct?

    If so, I'd ask a follow-up question. Who decides what is considered a moral "absolute"? Who gets to define them? A church? The Bible? Law? Common sense? Because I imagine that you'll find wildly differing opinions on what constitutes all of the above, which - by definition - invalidates something as an "absolute".

    And I'd elevate Maher to "always douchebag" status, even though I often agree with him.


    Heh. I was being polite. I often find Maher personally objectionable despite being occasionally funny and usually right. Dunno if that's just his schtick or who he really is, but I don't think I'd want to go out for beers with him.

    You know who else lives by moral absolutes? ISIS! I'll bet their absolutes and Arclight's absolutes don't overlap very much. Moral absolutes are relative.

    That said, a handful of prohibitions, such as those against murder and incest, are remarkably widespread across cultures and history. Regardless of what authority laid them down, they persist because they helped our species survive and our societies cohere.

    IDK what any of this has to do with chocolate labs though. Maybe we're just trying to actually get a P&R thread to page 2 before it degrades into name-calling?


    Whatever, dick. :p
  • uxFOOL
    uxFOOL
    GT Manager
    11219449_719979418133890_2990161522040506830_o.jpg

    Mike Dunn
    Executive Producer & Editor-at-Large
    GAMING TREND

  • Ironrod
    Ironrod
    GT Member
    :icon_biggrin:
  • Gratch
    Gratch
    GT Member
    Man, that first pic looks a lot like Vader. Was about a year ago we had to have him put down...I still miss him. :(
  • Lee
    Lee
    GT Member
    on 1441589277:

    :icon_biggrin:

    +1.

    We should argue about that topic!
Sign In or Register to comment.