It's always hard to debate with people online because it's becoming increasingly clear that there's no such thing as right or wrong, just opinions. Debating online really is like the special olympics, even if you win...well, you know how it ends. The point is, there seems to be an increasingly prevalent belief that you should respect someone's opinions, no matter how outlandish or nonsensical they are. Of course, this all started with Religion, in my mind (sorry, it makes no sense, and to date nobody has been able to present compelling evidence to the contrary), but it has spread to pretty much every debate point or hot topic on the internet, even ones that have conclusive scientific proof supporting one side and completely destroying the other.

Don't get me wrong, on some hot button topics there legitimately ARE two sides to the coin. Stuff like Abortion and Euthanasia certainly have compelling arguments on either side of the coin that should be discussed at length, I even think that religion has its place in a philosophy class, but there are plenty of things that have right answers and wrong answers, and no longer need to be discussed. There are such things as truths, and frankly they need to be addressed, and those who disagree with them can be conveniently ignored and disregarded.

Circumcision is a barbaric act and has no medical benefits.

Your sexuality is not a choice.

Forcing yourself to do or be something that is against your nature is harmful.

Your skin color does not dictate your actions.

Evolution is conclusively proven and has been witnessed.

Climate Change is most certainly a thing and needs to be addressed.

Guns are tools that are specifically designed to kill.

I could go on, but those are some of the more immediate hot spots that are on my mind a lot lately, things I've actually argued with people over. There are people out there so mentally deprived that they actually think you can chose your sexuality, or that people are 'pretending to be gay to piss us off.' There are actually people out there who honestly think that a biological phenomenon that's been studied, documented, and recreated in a lab is just a liberal conspiracy. There are people out there that honestly believe that circumcision is healthier for the baby in spite of it being proven to not be the case (in addition to permanently desensitizing the dude's junk). Some of these things aren't well known facts, and it often finds some digging to show it,but there's no reason that, when presented with conclusive evidence, people should dismiss it just because it doesn't coincide with their beliefs or perceptions.

There was a time in my life where I'd go on 5000 word rants filled with logically explained viewpoints, plenty of supporting evidence, and compelling arguments every time I encountered someone saying something stupid, but the more I did it, the more futile it became. As time went on, and as my effort to cleanse the world of ignorance continued, I kind of gave up. I still like pointing out flaws in people's logic from time to time, but I don't bother with the well researched retorts or the cited examples anymore because the collective stupidity of the internet has ruined my hope for humanity. It's becoming increasingly clear that knowledge and enlightenment scares some people, and they will combat it with all their might when an opposing viewpoint is presented.

Some people say I'm sociopathic, that I'm dangerous or hateful or spiteful...well, you would be too if you were surrounded by idiots that outnumbered you and had more control over the world than you. The problem isn't that these people are stupid, or that the ignorant are aggressive in their desire to remain ignorant, it's that the smart, civilized people have pretty much thrown up their hands and collectively given up, conceding that “We all are entitled to our opinions”, like it would be a crime to try and beat the stupid out of the masses.

Well, I have a problem with this. I mean, I don't WANT to be confrontational, I don't WANT to be that guy who thinks he knows everything all the time and I certainly don't want to be the kind of person who seems to get a glint in his eye when he proves someone wrong or shoves his opinion down the throats of others, but I'm finding it harder and harder to live in a world where the ignorant thrive and the intelligent are expected to keep to themselves. I know Sheldon Cooper is a fictional character in a sitcom, but I feel more and more like him every day; there's nothing worse than just wanting to share your knowledge with others and having them dismiss you or basically tell you they don't want to hear it. Is there anything in this world more disappointing than people who don't want to learn?

It's not a matter of malice or arrogance to me, it's a simple matter of right and wrong; it's not a matter of opinion, sometimes a fact is a fact, and there's nothing you can do to argue it. When someone tells me “Evolution is a myth”, that's not a matter of opinion, that's a factual error. I know everyone hates the guy who corrects you or assumes himself superior for whatever reason, but when you're wrong you're wrong; it's not fair to be treated like shit just because you want to help make the world a better place by sharing knowledge.

This is precisely why I've taken to simply dismissing those who are wrong. I recently got into a pretty heated argument (It's not a debate, it stopped being a debate before I even showed up) about whether homosexuality was a choice or if it was harmful, and after a few pages of interacting with the various people in the thread, getting an idea of what people thought or where people stood, I basically stood up on the soap box and publicly informed those who felt that homosexuality was a choice and that it was harmful that they were wrong, they were bigoted, they were ignorant, and they had no right discussing a matter they clearly had no knowledge about. Naturally, I was turned into the target, and ALL of the people in the thread turned on me because I dared to assume the mantle of superiority, like my 'opinion' was worth more than theirs, and that I had no right to be judgemental.

If this was a matter of opinion, I would be an arrogant, rude, horrible person for assuming my side was right and theirs was wrong. If we were discussing music and someone said “Justin Bieber is awesome, Queen sucks”, I'd disagree with them, but I certainly wouldn't tell them they were wrong. Well, I might, but if I did, I'd substantiate my claim with proof, but I certainly wouldn't be bothered by people not liking Queen and liking Justin Bieber, as we are all entitled to our own opinions. However, when it comes to important, socially poignant fodder like gender roles and scientific progress, I certainly don't think it's acceptable to push an ignorant belief as fact, or passing it off as opinion and crying 'censorship' or 'persecution' when you're told you're wrong.

I used to be great at debating and discussing hot topics, but now I don't bother. I'd love to take the time to explain to each one of these people why they're wrong and sit them down to have an intellectual intervention, but all I'd get is aggression and continued ignorance. The art of the debate is dead, stupidity reigns supreme, and we now live in a world where any ill-conceived theory or stance can be masked as an opinion and shielded by the guise of free speech. Well I'm sorry people, but there often are clearly defined rights and wrongs, and sometimes the truth needs to be told even if a few people can't handle it or are offended by it.

This is why I've taken such a strong stance against religion in the past few years. While I do certainly feel that the idea at its core is rather silly and completely without scientific merit, if people wish to believe in a God or Gods, I truly do think everyone has a right to do that. However, the second that belief starts to invade places it doesn't belong such as our senate houses or classrooms, it should be the job of the intellectually responsible to ensure that those viewpoints that are not substantiated or adequately supported by evidence are squashed and thrown to the curb to rot with the rest of the trash.

Sometimes, aggression is necessary. Sadly, the ones smart enough to know better are also the ones civilized enough to not cause a riot. Well, my friends, sometimes you gotta fight for what's right, passivity does not breed progression.   

I actually do agree with most of the points you are trying to make.  It is very hard to educate the ignorate without being agressive.  But even in some of the topics you listed as 'truths' could easily be up for debate.  Circumcision has it's benefits (pee better, easier to clean, etc..) and their is a counter arguement for global warming (earth is in natural warming trend, falsified documents, etc..).  While I actually do believe in global warming is a result of mankind (and also support circumcision) for you to say these are undeniable truths seems are things that can still be debated.  Their are certain things; however, that can't be argued that people insist on argueing about.

yeah, but there's that thing where you're mutilating your child's genitals becuase YOU think it would be nice.  I mean, I should have clarified that INFANT circumcision is the issue.  If you grow up and want to get cut, you have every right to do so if you think the pros (better looking, easier to clean/pee) outweigh the cons (loss of sensitivity, virtually irreversible) and the neutrals (Neither cut nor uncut have proven to be inherently cleaner or healthier), then go right ahead.  However, forcing your decisions on a kid (perhps it's a religious rite, perhaps you got cut as  a kid and happened to like it so why not share) is a decision that you're taking away from him for no good reason.  you don't know if he'll grow up to care about pulling it back to pee or clean it or not, you don't know what he'll value as an adult, visually or physically.  Something THAT intimate should certainly be your own decision, not the decision of your parents, as it effects your sex life, something that will last you theoretically from puberty to death.  

What I'm saying is that I should have clarified: Infantile circumcision without good reason is not really up for debate, but the act in and of itself is up to the individual. Is that fair?  

Too hard to roll the foreskins back while you're in the shower?

I wouldn't know, I'm circumsized. I was circumsized because my grandmother was veyr religious, but I'm thankful for the fact that my parents made the decision to do that.  Being circumsized is much more appearling to the majority of women I've been with.  

I must say, I agree with you on almost everything there. The only place my opinion differs is climate change. While I do believe climate change is real and it is best interest of humans to keep Earth as comfortable as possible, I truly believe we've had very little impact on Earths climate and there's very little if not nothing we can do to change it. At least with our current primitive technology. Our world is not constant. Climate change is just the natural life cycle of our planet.

I live in the only house in 123456789 Kms around where people open the house's windows in summer (with 40ºC outside) and close them at night. And don't try to argue with them. We live in a third floor so only spiderman's evil counterpart could use the windows to rob us. And this is only the first thing that comes to my mind.

So yes, I have to deal with it everyday and I know how does it feel.

I agree, there is such a thing as right and wrong. I see your posts, I know what you're talking about.

The stupid and ignorant should not be placed on the same level as the intelligent and educated.

Example: Illness is caused by demonic possession VS Germ theory of disease - - - It is completely insane to say that neither is right or wrong and both are just opinions. Most things like this are NOT a matter of opinion.

You mean like how Vita sales is "acceptable"?

1.  This is debatable.  Evidence to the contrary suggests that there are indeed medical benefits.  Mainly in the prevention of disease/illness.  Should parents hold off on circumcising for as long as possible?  Sure, but there are issues that a parent may run into during infancy that require the child be circumcised.  Namely recurring urinary tract infections, as well as a few other conditions.  To say there are none is just ignorance of the issues that exist, most likely because you've never experienced them.

2.  Again, debatable.  My personal opinion is that sexuality is a choice.  It may not be the same kind of choice that you make when you decide to eat at Subway instead of McDonald's, but I do believe one's environment helps determine paths and choices.  Likewise, I don't believe hormones dictate sexual preference.  It boils down to the experiences of that person and how they influence them.

3.  Again, debatable.  If you believe sexuality is a learned response, then change is a perfectly reasonable thing to believe that could be beneficial.  Just as changing the behavior of someone with OCD or TTM has a beneficial outcome.  You believe people are hardwired for sexuality, I don't.  I believe what we are hardwired for is to eat, breath, drink, and have sex.  Everything else and in between is a learned experience, including what to eat, what to drink, what to breath and who to have sex with.

4.  Again, debatable but sadly I think this is due to environment.  There are two issues at work here, some people are in an environment where it is too difficult to break out of (i.e. it is easier to follow a certain path and they are not challenged to follow a different one) and others are pigeon holed.  In terms of the latter, there are unfortunately people who stereo-type and because of that they fall into that stereo-type.

I can speak from personal experience, where a person I know is going down a path contrary to their upbringing simply because they want to fit into a specific culture.  Granted, neither this nor my initial response is quite what you're talking about.  You're talking very literally, where I'm implying people can fall into a stereo-type.     

 5.  Your challenge here is in framing it with respect to religion.  Only those fervently religious will deny evolution.  So how do you frame it within the context of religion?  Simple.  If God is perfect, and Adam was made in God's image, Eve was made from Adam's rib, and DNA is composed of 26 chromosome pairs, then why do we not all look alike?  All men would look like God, and all women would look like a female version of God.  So why are there blonds, brunettes, red heads, blue eyes, brown eyes, green eyes, and everything in between?

6.  This doesn't address the brunt of the argument, which is global warming a man-made thing or is it a naturally cyclical thing.  The argument that it is naturally cyclical is what most people who now argue against global warming use, but the problem is the world was different during the last warming.  The problem is that some people see the world as static, never changing, so the world we see today was the same as the world that existed during the last warming cycle.  It isn't.  There is a significant difference in that the land bridge between North and South America (essentially Central America) didn't exist during the last warming cycle.  The currents flowed from the Pacific to the Atlantic helping to keep th oceans warmer.  When this land bridge finally formed, those currents were cut off and the planet cooled significant sending us into an ice age.

If that isn't enough, there is significant evidence that shows the impact of naturally occurring phenomenon on the environment, not to mention the impact of human carbon dioxide production since the industrial age and our overall impact on the environment since the rise of modern man over 20,000 years ago.

7.  They can however, also be tools for hunting or as a hobby for shooting.  You can't argue your point without also accepting the other two points.  What a tool is designed to do and how people use them are two different things.  A hammer is designed to pound a nail into a board, but you'd be amazed at how many people use it for a screw driver. a mallet, or an instrument of death.  Likewise, knifes were tools invented for killing as well, but they've also been utilized as a utensil for eating, an implement for preparing game or fish, letter/box opener, and for sport/hobby.