The methods of conversion

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
Good Evening All,

How many times have you started browsing through the topics, see 1 and go "oh shit that guys is nuts/a zionist/an asshole/ a neocon/a nazi/racist/whatever" and instantly jump down their throat because you disagree with them? I'm guilty, and I haven't even been here that long. I'm also extremely sarcastic which doesn't help. I started posting here because there seemed to be a more mature (for lack of a better word) group of people here. I think as a person gets older, they start to get wiser if they are lucky.

When I was younger I questioned everything, saw some conspiracys around some corners and my thought process was all over the place as I tried to label myself. A lot of my thinking has changed over the years as I've gotten older and maybe wiser. My core beliefs are basically the same, and I don't really consider myself a conservative or a liberal. For me it depends on the issue at hand.

I think 2 people can agree to disagree and move forward from there. It's obvious to me that OCA and RWA both have very strong opinions vis a vis AA. I don't think either will convince the other to see it from their own point of view. Is that really a bad thing that they don't agree? I don't know (or really care for that matter: ) but both of these guys bring a different perspective to the board. To write either one of them off because you don't agree with them may close your mind to something you may not have considered previously.

Sometimes someone will post something that I think is totally assinine. I call them on it and try to question their logic to see how they got to that line of thinking. If the response I get is "you're just a nut/zionist/asshole/libby/neocon/ nazi/racist/whatever" and no real answer, I give up on them and move on. I think you really have to consider the context that the post is presented in. The person who posts "Bush is an idiot" and runs away or posts a bunch of crap that is recycled from the Yahoo board is probably not going to listen to reason. You have to try once or twice to engage them. If they can't carry on a decent conversation what's the point? Life is too short .

Most people here must feel very passionate about certain issues, or they wouldn't be spending time reading and replying to posts on here. I have given nasty over the top replies to somebody in 1 thread, and agreed with them on another thread. The whole goal (for me anyhow) is to learn and see what other people think about certain things.

It doesn't take long if you are observant to see what threads to avoid, and which posters you'll never agree with.


Flame away if you feel the need
:bat:

Awesomely appropriate and eloquent post.
I know I am guilty of getting carried away sometimes, but oh these racists provoke me. So, onward and upward I go

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
Everytime I see that avatar I crack up.....hysterical!

I came programmed with the sense of humor option at the factory

And yes, I'm voting for Bush:

lol, glad you like it-
"If we couldn't laugh we would all go insane!", I think that whacky Jimmy Buffet said that.

Can't believe I've been accused of being un-patriotic because of it.
If Bush were to go undercover abroad, he very well might look like that.

Think it's time for a change, though...

 

[JIHADTHIS]

Originally posted by nycflasher
Awesomely appropriate and eloquent post.
I know I am guilty of getting carried away sometimes, but oh these racists provoke me. So, onward and upward I go

Thanks nycflasher, I think I may even have gone after you on a thread once!!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

nycflasher, do you think it's ok to discriminate against whites?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
just like an extremist.

No. It's called having a value system.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
No. It's called having a value system.

wrong, its called extremism.

everybody has values, they may be different but they have them. Nobody said to legalize murder and your comment about it reeks of extremism. A society can allow for a broad range of values that can be different and still have limits on that range, as in murder etc. etc.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
wrong, its called extremism.

everybody has values, they may be different but they have them. Nobody said to legalize murder and your comment about it reeks of extremism. A society can allow for a broad range of values that can be different and still have limits on that range, as in murder etc. etc.

No, it's called an example.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
No, it's called an example.

fine, an extreme example that was worthless when talking about basic value systems of the average adult human.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
fine, an extreme example that was worthless when talking about basic value systems of the average adult human.

No, it was a good one.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
No, it was a good one.

how is using something as extreme as murder when we talk about compromise considered a good example? it's not.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
how is using something as extreme as murder when we talk about compromise considered a good example? it's not.

Being against murder is a value. Are you willing to compromise on it?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Being against murder is a value. Are you willing to compromise on it?

of course not, the issue doesn't apply to what my point was anyway, but you're doing anything you can to avoid that.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
of course not, the issue doesn't apply to what my point was anyway, but you're doing anything you can to avoid that.

It does apply. You're talking about compromise. I'm saying some things shouldn't be compromised on. Is that insane or something?

 

[nycflasher]

DK, I just read your initial post here which somehow had escaped me.
Really nice work.

It really comes down to looking at issues I think and not getting caught up in the he said/she said, cons/libs say propoganda that floods the mainstream media and even mainstream thought.

I mean, when you look at the fact that our country is basicaly split into two parties, it is rediculous to think that everyone in one party is going to agree on an issue and just as rediculous to think that each issue has only two sides!

So when I raise a point, and it is countered with lib this and lib that... I can only say you missed the point. Yes I am talking to you RWA.

And I'll be keeping your words here in mind, DK, they are extremely wise.

One thing I learned in leadership training is that some of the best leaders lead from the back... which is almost what you are advocating here. A leader that leads from the front to much can turn people away.
If that makes sense. Not a perfect analogy, but I am suggesting just what you said that the more vocal you are(especially when offensive) about a point the more you might lose the audience you are trying to gain.

Well done.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by nycflasher
DK, I just read your initial post here which somehow had escaped me.
Really nice work.

It really comes down to looking at issues I think and not getting caught up in the he said/she said, cons/libs say propoganda that floods the mainstream media and even mainstream thought.

I mean, when you look at the fact that our country is basicaly split into two parties, it is rediculous to think that everyone in one party is going to agree on an issue and just as rediculous to think that each issue has only two sides!

So when I raise a point, and it is countered with lib this and lib that... I can only say you missed the point. Yes I am talking to you RWA.

And I'll be keeping your words here in mind, DK, they are extremely wise.

One thing I learned in leadership training is that some of the best leaders lead from the back... which is almost what you are advocating here. A leader that leads from the front to much can turn people away.
If that makes sense. Not a perfect analogy, but I am suggesting just what you said that the more vocal you are(especially when offensive) about a point the more you might lose the audience you are trying to gain.

Well done.

The reason society is split 50/50 is because 50 percent are producers and the other 50 percent are leeches, government workers, lawyers, academics and their indoctrinated youth brigade, enviriomental wackos and and union members (brainwashed by socialists). It's an unholy alliance. The agenda of this whole half of society is to shackle the producers of society to THEIR needs.

I'm sorry if it bothers you, nycflasher, but accurate generalizations can be made about libs.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
It does apply. You're talking about compromise. I'm saying some things shouldn't be compromised on. Is that insane or something?

we already compromise on murder as well as other violent crimes, however, I was talking about compromise in the way we enact legislation. Coming to terms so that both sides, or more sides, get some of the things they feel we all need.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
The reason society is split 50/50 is because 50 percent are producers and the other 50 percent are leeches, government workers, lawyers, academics and their indoctrinated youth brigade, enviriomental wackos and and union members (brainwashed by socialists). It's an unholy alliance. The agenda of this whole half of society is to shackle the producers of society to THEIR needs.

I'm sorry if it bothers you, nycflasher, but accurate generalizations can be made about libs.

lets see, do I hold up the BS sign or do I just go blah, blah, blah?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
lets see, do I hold up the BS sign or do I just go blah, blah, blah?

It doesn't matter; neither are persuasive.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
The reason society is split 50/50 is because 50 percent are producers and the other 50 percent are leeches, government workers, lawyers, academics and their indoctrinated youth brigade, enviriomental wackos and and union members (brainwashed by socialists). It's an unholy alliance. The agenda of this whole half of society is to shackle the producers of society to THEIR needs.

So as a government employee - in fact, as a man who has been working for the federal government since age 17 - which side does that put me on?!?

Great generalization.

 

[DKSuddeth]

persuasive much, am I? :cof: