The Klartext Landfill for Absurd, Ignorant, and Deplorable Posts VI

[Figueira]

This isn't necessarily "objectively bad" but I'm putting it here to register extreme displeasure both with the attitudes involved and in the fact that this is what the author came back for.

Merry Christmas everyone!

Here is a 'holiday special' post (because this issue matters a great deal to me and I can't not respond to it)


People who are severely mentally or physically disabled are a burden. A huge burden. As are the elderly and most children for that matter (I'll leave that there for reasons that should be obvious) A massive part of my old job was acting in a medical-legal capacity with children who were severely disabled. I have first hand experience of the family difficulties and the support difficulties surrounding this. I have allocated funding, medical treatment, respite care and long term residential care. I've communicated with those who can communicate. I've appointed legal advocates for them. I have went to court for them.

It's taxing and ludicrously expensive. You can love someone to the point you'd do anything for them, but they are still a burden. Saying someone is a 'burden' or a 'strain' says nothing and implies nothing with respect to how you actually view that person. Pretending otherwise, or feigning obliviousness is in fact, a backhanded insult. If you couch a 'burden' in neutral 'loving' terms, that leads to people not taking your requirements and your needs for help and assistance seriously. Because 'didn't you say they weren't a burden?' We're already seeing this (in the UK at least) when it comes to residential provision. I'm sorry Nathan, but saying that caring for someone who can't care for themselves is a 'privilege and honor' is nothing but wank. It's not. It's a duty. It's a burden. And if you're doing it or thinking about it as some form of self reflection of penance then you'd last 5 minutes either caring for a loved one or for others in a voluntary or professional capacity.

That's point one. Point two, and on a different line of thought entirely, is that those who have an debilitating or inhibitive disability that is hereditary and that they would not wish upon their childrenas much they are able to deal with it in themselves, tend to be the most supportive of ways and means to mitigate this. Which pro-life fetishists tend not to have much time for because that involves both the act of termination and the use of embryology (founded as it is on the destructive study of embryos in the first instance, and the selective manner of implantation) as factors. The alternative is not having biological children; surrogacy or adoption. And while all of these are wonderful and noble things to do, it is a slap in the face to someone who can use these means in order to have their own biological children.

Nah, I'd say that's an objectively bad post. And I'm pro-choice.

[Figueira]

Massive FF. Will make an excellent Ambassador. The left's reaction has been wonderfully amusing so far.

[Figueira]

Hopefully Baker will be allowed to run unopposed.

This would be a bad post regardless of who it was talking about, to be honest.

[Figueira]

Sometimes I start to warm up to DavidB., and then he says things like this:

I question those who link the actions of the israeli government and people of Jewish descent together in a way that a criticism of one is equal to an attack on the other.

This is like saying "I support segregation but I really really like black people"

To a non-Jew, this comparison is hard to comprehend.

To a Jew, this comparison is still ridiculous.

A Jew who's not merely an asaJew will understand, though.

[Figueira]

Moderate heroism at its finest.

Ok, where do I go to donate money to Lynch? If there's anything I dislike more than the alt-right, it's social justice warriors.

For me - they are mirror images of each other. So - i equally dislike BOTH...

People who care about racial issues are JUST AS BAD as neo-Nazis!!!!!1

No. People who are unable able to listen , always think they are (and - only they) - right, and impose their point of view on other by ANY means (including slander) are as bad as neo-Nazis. I am color-blind, so i am absolutely for ALL possible rights for minorities, and as absolutely - against ANY privileges for them

[Figueira]

by 2024 I think TX, AZ, GA, FL will likely lean Dem (which will overwhelm the Rust Belt likely leaning Rep).   So I think 2024 will be a tough year for Repub presidential nom... if current trends continue.

More in the absurd part of it

That entire post is absurd, not just the part that you bolded.

[Figueira]

The problem with SJWs is the way they take up causes which are in themselves noble and worth pursuing, but wind up making themselves the focus of their causes rather than the issues themselves so that they can feel morally superior to people they deem "bigoted," including those who support the changes they claim to be rallying for but criticize the questionable tactics and demeanor of certain individuals.  And if you dare pointing that out, they either try to censor you or they associate you with the people who tried to silence civil rights activists in the 1950s.  Which is a tad ironic, if you think about it.  But, if there's one thing SJWs are good at, it's eating their own, and that's why they will never be taken seriously.

I wouldn't compare them to the alt-right, per se, but I do see many parallels between them and the folks who were part of the "Moral Majority" that dominated the culture wars in the 80s and 90s.  Back then, the fiends responsible for society's disintegration were Marilyn Manson and Ice T.  Now it's a bunch of comedians and video game programmers and people who write for TV shows.  And the quality of our entertainment media has suffered for it, if you want one person's opinion.

Yeah, there are areas where you can criticize the tactics of modern social justice advocates, but that doesn't justify comparing them to neo-Nazis.

[Figueira]

Moderate heroism at its finest.

Ok, where do I go to donate money to Lynch? If there's anything I dislike more than the alt-right, it's social justice warriors.

For me - they are mirror images of each other. So - i equally dislike BOTH...

People who care about racial issues are JUST AS BAD as neo-Nazis!!!!!1

No. People who are unable able to listen , always think they are (and - only they) - right, and impose their point of view on other by ANY means (including slander) are as bad as neo-Nazis. I am color-blind, so i am absolutely for ALL possible rights for minorities, and as absolutely - against ANY privileges for them

Nothing wrong with opposing affirmative action, it is the morally correct position.

I happen to support affirmative action, but the reason I posted that there is because of the comparison of "SJWs" to neo-Nazis.

[Figueira]

What does "unaffiliated" actually mean? Like, if you go to church at times but you're not a member of it yet you do self-ID as a certain denomination, are you considered to be unaffiliated?

Anyway, great to see quite some Congresspeople don't want to come out regarding their irreligiosity. It should not be normalized or promoted.

F**king disgusting.

Isn't an important part of atheism a rejection of trying to evangelize and convert others?

No. The only important part of atheism is the belief that God does not exist. Everything else is superfluous.

[Figueira]

Why does consent matter in terms of morality? Is it acceptable to take drugs, because you consented to it. Is it acceptable to have a sword fight to the death if both parties consented to it? Consent matters jack shyte, in laws or morality.

Well, I would say that the lack of consent matters a very great deal to morality and laws...

Lack of Consent, yes, giving consent should not matter on a vast of majority of circumstances.

I don't see why that's a bad post in that context. It can certainly be disagreed with from a left- or right-libertarian perspective, but it's not a bad post.

[Figueira]

Context: Opinion of Cory Booker

It's going to be beautiful when Democrats are forced to flock under either him, Harris, or someone else in the identity politics establishment.

[Figueira]

Someone should just take all the quoted posts by Santander here and move them to the simple truths thread.

[Figueira]

That is a genuinely absurd post in light of the fact that Communist parties have a hilariously poor track record at crushing fascist and fascist-aligned movements (Germany, Spain, Italy, Hungary etc).

In that sense, sure.

[Figueira]

That is a genuinely absurd post in light of the fact that Communist parties have a hilariously poor track record at crushing fascist and fascist-aligned movements (Germany, Spain, Italy, Hungary etc).

In that sense, sure.

What other "sense" is there?

The Soviet Union (along with the US, UK, etc.) crushing the Nazis?

However, looking at the context of the quoted post, it was referring to the other sense, so meh. You win this one I guess.

[Figueira]

Very, very bad. Now this would be a valid reason for a Women's March.

[Figueira]

This is what the abortion debate seems like:

-A man is murdering people, and has been doing so for decades.
-Nine people are in a room, and are about to take a vote on whether or not to call the police about this man.
-Four people want to immediately call the police.
-Three people don't actually think that the man is guilty, so they see no point in calling the cops.
-One person says that, "While I personally believe he shouldn't be killing people, I shouldn't force my morality on others."
-Another person says "We all agree that killing people isn't ideal, but his victims are mostly poor people.  And I don't see any of you volunteering to pay for his future victims medical bills.  That means that you don't really care about the lives of his victims."

So they voted 5-4 to not call the police.  The 5 were convinced that they had a moral high ground and attacked the 4, claiming that calling the cops on the murderer would mean the establishment of a theocracy.

That post belongs in the good post gallery.

No, it really doesn't.  It's a dumb straw-man masquerading as a clever post.

The whole metaphor only works if you accept that abortion = murder, which is the what the whole controversy is about.

It also assumes that the best solution to abortion (assuming it's bad) is to "call the cops" i.e. make abortion illegal, which isn't self-evident at all.

[Figueira]

ER has to be a parody account.

If he's a troll, he's an absurdist genius and therefore still fits in this thread.

-ER is not a troll; otherwise he would have supported deporting immigrants on welfare (which is an obvious EO for Trump to sign, and which I support strongly). He has views and beliefs of his own.

If I were a troll, wouldn't I have supported Trump in the primary, rather than hoping a movement conservative would get the nomination?  I also do have a more complicated view of immigration than the current administration.

Now, if I changed my name to "ExtremeDemocrat (D-CA)" with a PM of -10 E, -9 S, then that would be trolling!

Not that I think you're a troll, but I think supporting Cruz fits your stereotype pretty well.

[Figueira]

Good, glad she was confirmed. Democrats engaged in so much damn character assassination on this confirmation hearing. not only on DeVos but on all education advocates who supported charter schools or private vouchers.

It's pretty clear that SunriseAroundTheWorld is a generic Trumpist who somehow gets a pass because he uses big words, or something.

[Figueira]

The (quite obvious) point was that his post was pretty clearly in the realm of unacceptable. Your claim that my post says that "saying any bad thing about any group of people ought to be prohibited " also  misses the point. Transsexuality isn't a political ideology.

Your posting history indicates that you believe that people should not be allowed to criticize groups with which you strongly identify, especially atheists and transsexuals.

Yes, this is a strong accusation. To anyone reading this thread who is not familiar with Scarlet's posting history, I encourage you to take a look. I think you will find that I am not exaggerating.

Given that history, unless you can articulate a clear standard separating the hateful from the merely critical, no one should take your judgments about what is acceptable and what is unacceptable particularly seriously.

[Figueira]

DavidB. has really been going downhill recently.

Seriously. All of you people (Averroes, etc.) should be ashamed of yourselves.

Anyway. I don't really support deleting posts as a form of moderation, but I do think that ER should face some sort of repercussion for that.

I'll remind you of this when you protest Trump encroaching on dissenters' first amendment rights or something like that. After all, people do need to face "some sort of repercussion" for disagreeing with the status-quo

Yeah, ER's opinion is probably stupid. No, we should not moderate stupid opinions. It's that simple.

[Figueira]

No, he hasn't. He's fine. You not liking his views doesn't make him a bad poster.

Comparing moderators moderating an Internet forum to Presidents suppressing free speech? I'd call that a bad post. But you're free to disagree.

[Figueira]

ONG, she's 83. EIGHTHY-THREE.

So what? "Old Strom" served until 100, Robert Byrd - until 92, IIRC. Both were not idiots, that sure...

Strom Thurmond was a racist old kook before he retired

Thurmond wasn't a racist since 1970th, when he began to hire Black assistants and help Blacks to be appointed to different posts. Thurmond of 1970th was different from Thurmond of 1948.. Conservative - of course, but no more racist.. History changes people just as vice versa..

[Figueira]

Appeals to tradition, Everywhere!

Heck no , the senate is not supposed to be representative of populations it's supposed to be representives of the states

Of course not. The Senate works fine as it is. Stop complaining because your cities-only strategy is locking you out of it, Democrats.

Democrats?

Amazing how nobody has managed to present a moral argument as to why some people should be better represented than others. 23 posts and nothing aside from DavidB's political expediency comment. Simply amazing.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it

-Ancient Chinese proverb

Most Federal states have a system somewhat like this.

The first post is just truth; that's really is what the Senate was built for.

Still an appeal to tradition.

[Figueira]

Well mine is literally not an appeal to tradition. I'm talking about current countries.

You're right, although I would have honestly put your entire post here, no offense.

[Figueira]

It's called a picture. I'm pretty sure.

Yet another reason you're an idiot.

Picture: the last airbender