How to Debate Current Events With The LGBT Posters

[Dogmaphobe]

Kind of like a non-Jew/non-Muslim who can't stop obsessing about Israel. Something must be motivating all that hatred over an issue that doesn't effect them.

Sure it affected me. I was in the army during the first Gulf War or "Operation make the Jews feel safe".

You have much in common with Silhouette.

Utter stupidity + irrational fear = repulsive bigot.

 

[Silhouette]

This poster ^^ clearly is old school and relies on pure ad hominem, but with a twist. It's the old "if you agree with my opponent, you are as fucked up (insert other debasing terms here) as they are". Nice. Thanks for that demonstration Dogmaphobe.

The way to get around this trick is to simply ignore a poster like him and just keep responding to others who are grown ups.

 

[JoeB131]

You have much in common with Silhouette.

Utter stupidity + irrational fear = repulsive bigot.

We;ve been fighting wars in the Middle East instigated by the Jews for 26 years now... I don't think it's "irrational" to ask why.

 

[JoeB131]

This poster ^^ clearly is old school and relies on pure ad hominem, but with a twist. It's the old "if you agree with my opponent, you are as fucked up (insert other debasing terms here) as they are". Nice. Thanks for that demonstration Dogmaphobe.

The way to get around this trick is to simply ignore a poster like him and just keep responding to others who are grown ups.

Give it up, Sil. No one is buying your schtick.

64% now support gay marriage.

U.S. Support for Gay Marriage Edges to New High

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Sixty-four percent of U.S. adults say same-sex marriages should be recognized by the law as valid. Although not meaningfully different from the 61% last year, this is the highest percentage to date and continues the generally steady rise since Gallup's trend began in 1996.


Your basic arguments is "My Imaginary Friend in the Sky says it's bad" and "I think it's icky when it's two dudes."

(Yes, you think it's so icky you just can't stop talking about it.)

 

[mudwhistle]

Inspired from this thread: Dumont v Lyons 2017 : Will Fathers (or Mothers) Be Judicially-Legislated Into Irrelevance? by comment #33

^Spam machine.

You should have seen Syri trying to convince everyone I must be a homosexual because I hate homosexual political activism yesterday. As unfruitful as that line is ....he still pushes that line.

What you need to understand, and I say this as a 15 year veteran of stumping against this cult overtaking our society, is that they employ the same tactics that Scientology does to beat down dissenters into submission. As all cults do. What you're experiencing is what I noticed long ago was the Ace of spades of sorts. When they feel someone is making points they cannot refute, they first beat them up with ad hominems. When that fails, they try distraction, also known as "introducing a strawman" for you to chase until you forgot the good points you were making and a few pages have bled back. Syriusly's specialty (for which she should get busted here at USMB) is spamming ad hominem posts to bleed pages she doesn't want viewers to see into obscurity.

When those things fail with one of their hallmark posters, usually mdk or Syriusly, you'll suddenly see a spate of "backup reinforcements". These are posters, LGBT sympathists who come on with a gang attack, smearing ad hominems and literally beating the crap out of you until you back off. If that fails...if all that regular routine fails...they have one favorite backup. And that's the Ace I mentioned. They accuse you of being a closeted homosexual because "you're so obsessed with homosexual topics'. In so doing, with a sweep of a word they back off most posters who were otherwise tenacious. And of course that has the added benefit of introducing yet another strawman topic; getting you to defend yourself and wander away from the subject.

I've seen these tactics used across the internet for decades now. This is how they controlled the conversation. This is how they corralled many who would have otherwise legitimately objected to gay marriage and now, forced-adoption to gays that they're trying (violating the Infancy Doctrine). This is what an organized cult looks like online.

So, don't buy into it. Stay the course. If you have points to make, make them. Bow your head to the flack. Ignore the invitations to flame, the insults, the badgering and yes, the accusations that you're a homo too. Ignore it all and stay the course. They hate that shit.

This is how leftist supporters win arguments.
They repeat fake news and then grin and laugh at you while you try to prove to them that their lies aren't the truth.
Many of their lies are obviously lies, but you have to prove that they are lies or they simply dismiss your common-sense argument off-hand without any rational discussion.
The other day one of them said Obama was a great president and Trump was a clown.
I said that Trump will prove to be a much better president than Obama and they say how.
I said for one example that Obama was illegally sending billions in taxpayers money to overseas banks.

How can I prove that?

I can't unless I sight media reports on the internet. Most of the leftist media refused to cover the story.

Then the leftist assholes says "Do you believe everything you read on the internet."
Well no.....but this asshole just got through repeating the same internet garbage the MSM has been feeding us....and he's obviously believing it.
So basically you're dealing with a liar who is calling you a liar and he doesn't have to prove it because he's a avid practitioner of pushing false stereotypes.

Point being, it's impossible to win an argument with a liar unless you have two or more honest people present to back you up.
It's all up to the numbers. If there are more liars present than honest people, the liars win the argument.

 

[Mac1958]

Point being, it's impossible to win an argument with a liar unless you have two or more honest people present to back you up. It's all up to the numbers. If there are more liars present than honest people, the liars win the argument.

I call this having an "asymmetrical" conversation, and I just no longer do it here. Once I realize I'm dealing with a liar, it's over. No need to waste my time.
.

 

[mudwhistle]

Point being, it's impossible to win an argument with a liar unless you have two or more honest people present to back you up. It's all up to the numbers. If there are more liars present than honest people, the liars win the argument.

I call this having an "asymmetrical" conversation, and I just no longer do it here. Once I realize I'm dealing with a liar, it's over. No need to waste my time.
.

Well, at least here you have a 50-50 chance of winning because at least this site isn't 9-1 filled with liberals.
That's the only reason I'm here.
Every other site I've been a member of is totally filled with lying liberals.
Also, if you notice, most liberal mods are constantly merging threads and trying to undercut your argument with their insider "facts". Most of the rightwinger mods don't get involved.

 

[mudwhistle]

Notice how the Dummycraps are so silent after their Russian Collusion breakthrough blew up in their faces?

 

[JoeB131]

Notice how the Dummycraps are so silent after their Russian Collusion breakthrough blew up in their faces?

Um, what does this have to do with LBGT rights?

 

[Silhouette]

I.call this having an "asymmetrical" conversation, and I just no longer do it here. Once I realize I'm dealing with a liar, it's over. No need to waste my time.
.

Too bad. Because that is exactly how they designed their plan to end up. The good fight isn't about you. It's about the content. You can see how if they exasperate enough decent people out of the debate....they win. I hope you change your mind on this.

 

[mdk]

I.call this having an "asymmetrical" conversation, and I just no longer do it here. Once I realize I'm dealing with a liar, it's over. No need to waste my time.
.

Too bad. Because that is exactly how they designed their plan to end up. The good fight isn't about you. It's about the content. You can see how if they exasperate enough decent people out of the debate....they win. I hope you change your mind on this.

It's telling that you think you're a decent person. The only one you are fooling is yourself as decent people don't craft wild stories to smear gays.

Does falsely claiming Dylan Roof was a homo and killed all those people in Charleston over gay marriage make you a decent person? Nope.

Does falsely claiming Chris Mercer was queer and killed all those people at Umpqua Community College over gay marriage make you a decent person? No, it doesn't.

Does falsely claiming Steven Jones shot and killed a person at Northern Arizona University b/c he was gay make you a decent person? Sure don't

 

[Silhouette]

This ^^ LGBT payroll blogger frequently defaults to soundbites from old conversations taken out of context, strung together as if "proof" his opponent "can never be taken seriously".

The remedy is to stay focused on the topic. That's always a good default remedy if you get stuck. And don't lose your train of thought.

 

[mdk]

This ^^ LGBT payroll blogger frequently defaults to soundbites from old conversations taken out of context, strung together as if "proof" his opponent "can never be taken seriously".

Taken out of context? lol. You stated quite plainly that Roof, Mercer, and, Jones were all gay.

Also, you don't need me for people not to take you seriously. You do a fine job all by yourself.

 

[mudwhistle]

I.call this having an "asymmetrical" conversation, and I just no longer do it here. Once I realize I'm dealing with a liar, it's over. No need to waste my time.
.

Too bad. Because that is exactly how they designed their plan to end up. The good fight isn't about you. It's about the content. You can see how if they exasperate enough decent people out of the debate....they win. I hope you change your mind on this.

It's telling that you think you're a decent person. The only one you are fooling is yourself as decent people don't craft wild stories to smear gays.

Does falsely claiming Dylan Roof was a homo and killed all those people in Charleston over gay marriage make you a decent person? Nope.

Does falsely claiming Chris Mercer was queer and killed all those people at Umpqua Community College over gay marriage make you a decent person? No, it doesn't.

Does falsely claiming Steven Jones shot and killed a person at Northern Arizona University b/c he was gay make you a decent person? Sure don't

Nope.
They all shot those people because secretly they love cock.

 

[sedwin]

So, to be clear, when you say other citizens with opinions are "cult members" or "homo's" YOU don't consider those words "ad hominem." You claim you are not a "homo" (to use your words), and because you are not the who are not fellow equal citizens and therefore should not have the same rights as you? Of course this is not the American ideal that all are equal under the law, this is a religious belief over our ideals which would make you a member of a cult, by definition. The suggestion that gays are "forced" to adopt is also a straw man as there is. no law that actually says this and no one has ever proposed such a law.

Your negative comments about other citizens seem to have no basis in reality other than to prove these are your own personal issues. Take responsibility for your own opinions.

Inspired from this thread: Dumont v Lyons 2017 : Will Fathers (or Mothers) Be Judicially-Legislated Into Irrelevance? by comment #33

^Spam machine.

You should have seen Syri trying to convince everyone I must be a homosexual because I hate homosexual political activism yesterday. As unfruitful as that line is ....he still pushes that line.

What you need to understand, and I say this as a 15 year veteran of stumping against this cult overtaking our society, is that they employ the same tactics that Scientology does to beat down dissenters into submission. As all cults do. What you're experiencing is what I noticed long ago was the Ace of spades of sorts. When they feel someone is making points they cannot refute, they first beat them up with ad hominems. When that fails, they try distraction, also known as "introducing a strawman" for you to chase until you forgot the good points you were making and a few pages have bled back. Syriusly's specialty (for which she should get busted here at USMB) is spamming ad hominem posts to bleed pages she doesn't want viewers to see into obscurity.

When those things fail with one of their hallmark posters, usually mdk or Syriusly, you'll suddenly see a spate of "backup reinforcements". These are posters, LGBT sympathists who come on with a gang attack, smearing ad hominems and literally beating the crap out of you until you back off. If that fails...if all that regular routine fails...they have one favorite backup. And that's the Ace I mentioned. They accuse you of being a closeted homosexual because "you're so obsessed with homosexual topics'. In so doing, with a sweep of a word they back off most posters who were otherwise tenacious. And of course that has the added benefit of introducing yet another strawman topic; getting you to defend yourself and wander away from the subject.

I've seen these tactics used across the internet for decades now. This is how they controlled the conversation. This is how they corralled many who would have otherwise legitimately objected to gay marriage and now, forced-adoption to gays that they're trying (violating the Infancy Doctrine). This is what an organized cult looks like online.

So, don't buy into it. Stay the course. If you have points to make, make them. Bow your head to the flack. Ignore the invitations to flame, the insults, the badgering and yes, the accusations that you're a homo too. Ignore it all and stay the course. They hate that shit.

 

[Silhouette]

A cult is a collection of people agreeing on behaviors within a certain parameter. And we have cult in language to indicate that the majority rejects those behaviors. So the term is accurate rather than derogatory and I stand by it.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

A cult is a collection of people agreeing on behaviors within a certain parameter. .

So what would you call a group of people who are uneducated, dishonest and absolutely obsessed with the sexual behavior of other people?

 

[Silhouette]

A cult is a collection of people agreeing on behaviors within a certain parameter. .

So what would you call a group of people who are uneducated, dishonest and absolutely obsessed with the sexual behavior of other people?

Whatever you fancy. However don't expect it to stop the points cold in their tracks that you don't want voting people thinking about... I don't call your cult a cult in order to stop the conversation. I hope and expect you'll join it with every single point you can think of to offer in defense. Your cult on the other hand practices surreptitious behavior in order to completely shut down the conversation as your pocket-judges continue to quietly insert language into the US Constitution that isn't there.

Hence the reason this conversation MUST continue. For it is nothing short of subversion of democracy itself. That it's being done by a deviant sex cult who's ultimate goal is to get at adoptable children that are hard to place, to bring home behind closed doors (for whatever reason) is like a chunk of rock salt in that wound.

 

[Syriusly]

A cult is a collection of people agreeing on behaviors within a certain parameter. And we have cult in language to indicate that the majority rejects those behaviors. So the term is accurate rather than derogatory and I stand by it.

Of course you stand by what the voices in your head tell you.

It of course has nothing to do with the real definition of cult- but you never let that kind of thing bother you.

Cult
a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object.
"the cult of St. Olaf"

• a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister.
  "a network of Satan-worshiping cults"
  synonyms: sect, denomination, group, movement, church, persuasion, body, faction
  "a religious cult"
• a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing.

 

[Syriusly]

A cult is a collection of people agreeing on behaviors within a certain parameter. .

So what would you call a group of people who are uneducated, dishonest and absolutely obsessed with the sexual behavior of other people?

I don't call your cult a cult in order to stop the conversation.

No more than someone calls a black man a 'N*gger' to stop a conversation.

Or an evangelical Christian calls the Mormon Church a cult to stop a conversation.

Still is just more of your usual derogatory hate the gays propaganda.