By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - World gone mad: People angry about "innocent until proven gulty"

Ka-pi96 said:
VGPolyglot said:

I'm beginning to wonder if contestgamer even has a coherent ideology, in the past he had mentioned not caring about the lives of Arabs because they're apparently worth less than a Whitney's life.

A Whitney? Just anybody/everybody ever called Whitney?

Autocorrect



Around the Network
contestgamer said:
Aeolus451 said:

That's progressive because you're saying that we should discriminate against people based on their sex and ethnicity. 

 

Wrong. You cant discriminate against whites/males. This is progressive because it evens the playing field and gives fairness to those most abused by our current system - the goal is a fair justice system, currently which it is not.

That's a fairly arbitrary evaluation, don't you think? When do you think that we've achieved a fair playing field? Context can create inequity without there being any judicial inequality.


By any metric, equality should NEVER be a goal in itself. We must strive for collective improvemnt. It is of course logical to help the least fortunate, seeing as that is where the most progress can be made. However, permitting injustice against individuals for the sole sake of satisfying egalitarian quotias between social groups is purely absurd, and morally corrupt.

Basing justice on the treatment of *groups* of people is ALWAYS a mistake. Every person has the right to be treated as an individual on none other than his own merits. What you are suggesting is creating *further* injustice against individuals to compensate inustice within groups, something that CANNOT be accepted, in any circumsatnce.



Bet with PeH: 

I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.

Bet with WagnerPaiva:

 

I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.

Aeolus451 said:
contestgamer said:

We're just fighting for quality and fairness. Trump got elected because there are a lot of bigots and racists still left. Over time though they will be marginalized once minority groups become the majority and stomp out white racism.

No, you're not. Your little group is fighting for an ideology and to keep their prescribed party in power. Trump was elected because of average americans getting tired of corrupted democrates doing things that only benefit them/keeping people voting for them and SJW/progressives twisting everything for their perverted world view. You don't give one shit about normal everyday people. Hell, you just shitted all over all males for the sake of a twisted version of justice. 

While contestgamer is a morron, I'd ask you to extend the courtesy and equally avoid overcategorizing populations on faults of some. Individuals have the right to be judged and regarded as individuals, encompassing terms such as alt-right, SJW, etc... are harmful to both discussion and these individual rights.



Bet with PeH: 

I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.

Bet with WagnerPaiva:

 

I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.

VGPolyglot said:
Aeolus451 said:

No, you're not. Your little group is fighting for an ideology and to keep their prescribed party in power. Trump was elected because of average americans getting tired of corrupted democrates doing things that only benefit them/keeping people voting for them and SJW/progressives twisting everything for their perverted world view. You don't give one shit about normal everyday people. Hell, you just shitted all over all males for the sake of a twisted version of justice. 

I'm beginning to wonder if contestgamer even has a coherent ideology, in the past he had mentioned not caring about the lives of Arabs because they're apparently worth less than a Whitney's life.

That's a possibility but I've seen alot of this variant of progressives saying the kind of stuff on social media and in articles. It's the main reason why I'm not a fan of progressives in general. I'm okay with the more chill ones but this kind of shit...  He could be emulating something he's seen or heard for I know. He also could just have a different opinion than others with a similar ideology. It gets convoluted when you ask a person what they think on a given case or situation and sometimes they disagree or agree in surprising ways. Take that "preemptive strike on NK" thread for an example where it doesn't fall neatly into party lines or ideology. It's the same thing on this topic but it's no where near as confusing as the NK topic. Some of the left agree with "innocent until proven guilty" while others of the left don't. 



palou said:
Aeolus451 said:

No, you're not. Your little group is fighting for an ideology and to keep their prescribed party in power. Trump was elected because of average americans getting tired of corrupted democrates doing things that only benefit them/keeping people voting for them and SJW/progressives twisting everything for their perverted world view. You don't give one shit about normal everyday people. Hell, you just shitted all over all males for the sake of a twisted version of justice. 

While contestgamer is a morron, I'd ask you to extend the courtesy and equally avoid overcategorizing populations on faults of some. Individuals have the right to be judged and regarded as individuals, encompassing terms such as alt-right, SJW, etc... are harmful to both discussion and these individual rights.

I'm using SJW in the correct context with him and what he is pushing for. *shrugs Would you rather me just conflate him with the left in general or would you rather me think of him as someone who's a part of their extreme? 



Around the Network
Aeolus451 said:
VGPolyglot said:

I'm beginning to wonder if contestgamer even has a coherent ideology, in the past he had mentioned not caring about the lives of Arabs because they're apparently worth less than a Whitney's life.

That's a possibility but I've seen alot of this variant of progressives saying the kind of stuff on social media and in articles. It's the main reason why I'm not a fan of progressives in general. I'm okay with the more chill ones but this kind of shit...  He could be emulating something he's seen or heard for I know. He also could just have a different opinion than others with a similar ideology. It gets convoluted when you ask a person what they think on a given case or situation and sometimes they disagree or agree in surprising ways. Take that "preemptive strike on NK" thread for an example where it doesn't fall neatly into party lines or ideology. It's the same thing on this topic but it's no where near as confusing as the NK topic. Some of the left agree with "innocent until proven guilty" while others of the left don't. 

And that's why I'll continue to advocate against the use of the terms conservative/progressive, right/left. These terms are more often than not used as accusations, blindly associating all the faults of a group on an individual, even if the faults are unrelated to the topic for which the association are made. People should be treated and judged by nothing else than their own, individual qualities and positions. No judgmetn should be made upon that that has yet to be stated.



Bet with PeH: 

I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.

Bet with WagnerPaiva:

 

I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.

Aeolus451 said:
palou said:

While contestgamer is a morron, I'd ask you to extend the courtesy and equally avoid overcategorizing populations on faults of some. Individuals have the right to be judged and regarded as individuals, encompassing terms such as alt-right, SJW, etc... are harmful to both discussion and these individual rights.

I'm using SJW in the correct context with him and what he is pushing for. *shrugs Would you rather me just conflate him with the left in general or would you rather me think of him as someone who's a part of their extreme? 

Just don't associate, at all. Name the flaws in what he said directly, that should be enough to open a crtique. I really don't see how saying that he's part of this or that group can positively affect discussion.



Bet with PeH: 

I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.

Bet with WagnerPaiva:

 

I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.

palou said:
Aeolus451 said:

That's a possibility but I've seen alot of this variant of progressives saying the kind of stuff on social media and in articles. It's the main reason why I'm not a fan of progressives in general. I'm okay with the more chill ones but this kind of shit...  He could be emulating something he's seen or heard for I know. He also could just have a different opinion than others with a similar ideology. It gets convoluted when you ask a person what they think on a given case or situation and sometimes they disagree or agree in surprising ways. Take that "preemptive strike on NK" thread for an example where it doesn't fall neatly into party lines or ideology. It's the same thing on this topic but it's no where near as confusing as the NK topic. Some of the left agree with "innocent until proven guilty" while others of the left don't. 

And that's why I'll continue to advocate against the use of the terms conservative/progressive, right/left. These terms are more often than not used as accusations, blindly associating all the faults of a group on an individual, even if the faults are unrelated to the topic for which the association are made. People should be treated and judged by nothing else than their own, individual qualities and positions. No judgmetn should be made upon that that has yet to be stated.

I agree with you about judging someone on their individual qualities when you're talking about them on a individual level but on political views, I disagree because for one thing, it's alot easier and quicker to assess where someone stands by them just stating what groups/ideology they agree with. It's entirely to complex to go over every issue to find out where someone stands on a individual level in a pratical manner that's quick. It's why poeple say they agree with a certain group on most things but disagree with them on this other thing. For example, I'm a right leaning libertarian. It's the closest thing to what I agree with. I support gay marriage, trans rights to a reasonable point, gun rights, prolife, for death penality, religious rights should be protected as they push their beliefs on others through law and I like free markets. 



palou said:
Aeolus451 said:

I'm using SJW in the correct context with him and what he is pushing for. *shrugs Would you rather me just conflate him with the left in general or would you rather me think of him as someone who's a part of their extreme? 

Just don't associate, at all. Name the flaws in what he said directly, that should be enough to open a crtique. I really don't see how saying that he's part of this or that group can positively affect discussion.

I did go with that a bit but his beliefs fall in line with a certain ideology. It's the extreme of it though. I pointed it out because there's plenty of people that think like that and it's not just some lone person. Multiple of us (left & right) tried to debate with him but he doesn't see any fault with his thinking. 



Because in the feminists' world, all men are guilty, and it's only a matter of time before they rape or assault someone.

It's amazing how the two most prominent campus rape stories promoted in the media over the last few years- the alleged UVA "gang rape" and Columbia University's "Mattress Girl"- turned out to be complete fabrications by the alleged victims, and entire people's lives and reputations were ruined in the process but the false accusers faced no penalty and are still to this day defended by many on the progressive / feminist side.

You'd think if there were actually 1 in 5 women on campus sexually assaulted as they have alleged repeatedly in the past, that so-called journalists and media personalities sympathetic of the feminist cause would be able to easily find someone who's actually been raped to tell their story.



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.