Proof that AJ's lying through his teeth - again

[4est_4est_Gump]

You don't think that you invite a negative response when you try to draw a moral equivalence between Haitian storm victims and murdering terrorists?

Only from those who view me negatively looking for any excuse to prove how closed their minds are to ideas that they have not adopted.

And there is no drawing of a "moral" equivalence, that would have actually have been what butters did to get this whole thing going, trying to excuse the antics of a racist with a thought I had that she disagreed with. I thought the hallmark of liberalism was polite disagreement and discussion, but that is clearly no longer true; the ideology has become so important that it has warped the minds of its adherents.

There is no "moral" judgement in my thoughts. It is an observation and partial conclusion about the nature of the human condition and how, in many diverse ways, people are willing to surrender their humanity be it corruption, religion or government-induced sloth.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Proper english is not proper English.

Good recovery...

 

[Saint Peter]

Good recovery...

That is no lie.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

That is no lie.

Do liberals know the difference between connotation and denotation?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

That can happen when one guy makes 76 posts in a single thread in a couple days.

Or when everyone breathlessly follows him around to see what he will say next...

 

[RobDownSouth]

Or when everyone breathlessly follows him around to see what he will say next...

Watching you run around trying to avoid responsbility for your own words is amusing.

http://i.imgur.com/zmlgywO.gif

 

[Adre]

Or when query breathlessly follows him around to see what he will say next...

Corrected.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

And yet, here you are...



Again. Day after day.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I am puzzled as to why you think that explaining that Haitians aren't the only people you regard as subhuman makes things better.

If you push him a bit, I suspect you'd find that the Chief regards anyone who disagrees with his political positions to be either

• sub-human
• subhuman, or
• less than human

 

[RobDownSouth]

Corrected.

Queerbait's an opportunistic beta male. He sees situations like this as an opportunity to move up the food chain.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

This thread quickly went past the post count of the thread from which it emanated from.


People love their drama more than their accolades.


Someone to hate is more popular than...



Someone to love.

 

[RobDownSouth]

This thread quickly went past the post count of the thread from which it emanated from.
People love their drama more than their accolades.
Someone to hate is more popular than...

Someone to love.

It's rather amusing to watch a man who routinely proclaims his own strict moral code duck and weave and 'asplain away the words he said but now denies he said, even in the face of overwhelmin' evidence.

It's a "real world" example of your Good Ole Sensei K's prime directive:
"Shit Your Pants! Run Away! Live to Smear Another Day! HAI!"

 

[cjh]

This thread quickly went past the post count of the thread from which it emanated from.


People love their drama more than their accolades.


Someone to hate is more popular than...



Someone to love.

We don't hate you.

We just think you're subhuman.

 

[RobDownSouth]

We don't hate you.

We just think you're less than human.

Fixed your post. Wording matters.
:nods:

 

[Queersetti]

Only from those who view me negatively looking for any excuse to prove how closed their minds are to ideas that they have not adopted.

And there is no drawing of a "moral" equivalence, that would have actually have been what butters did to get this whole thing going, trying to excuse the antics of a racist with a thought I had that she disagreed with. I thought the hallmark of liberalism was polite disagreement and discussion, but that is clearly no longer true; the ideology has become so important that it has warped the minds of its adherents.

There is no "moral" judgement in my thoughts. It is an observation and partial conclusion about the nature of the human condition and how, in many diverse ways, people are willing to surrender their humanity be it corruption, religion or government-induced sloth.

Do you really think that when you claim that people are "less than human" because you disapprove of their response to the conditions under which they live, you aren't making a moral judgment?

And, enough with the Rob excuse. Whenever someone takes issue with you, you try to make it about Rob. It gets more pathetic every time.

 

[Queersetti]

If you push him a bit, I suspect you'd find that the Chief regards anyone who disagrees with his political positions to be either

• sub-human
• subhuman, or
• less than human

I made that point a few pages back. Haitians aren't subhuman because of their race, they are are subhuman because they haven't read Friedrich Hayek.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Do you really think that when you claim that people are "less than human" because you disapprove of their response to the conditions under which they live, you aren't making a moral judgment?

...

No. It is not a moral judgement.

I think that others see it as a moral issue in that you are never allowed to point out the flaws that put the "unassailable victim" (a favorite tactic of the alligator-tear liberal) in any way shape or form culpable for their own condition. That is a sin in modern liberalism. I make the observation, you do the judging.

 

[Queersetti]

No. It is not a moral judgement.

I think that others see it as a moral issue in that you are never allowed to point out the flaws that put the "unassailable victim" (a favorite tactic of the alligator-tear liberal) in any way shape or form culpable for their own condition. That is a sin in modern liberalism. I make the observation, you do the judging.

If someone is subhuman, how can they be culpable for their own condition?

 

[cjh]

No. It is not a moral judgement.

I think that others see it as a moral issue in that you are never allowed to point out the flaws that put the "unassailable victim" (a favorite tactic of the alligator-tear liberal) in any way shape or form culpable for their own condition. That is a sin in modern liberalism. I make the observation, you do the judging.

So let's talk about flaws. Such as having no compassion.

It is not surprising that compassion is a natural tendency since it is essential for human survival. As has been brought to light by Keltner, the term “survival of the fittest,” often attributed to Charles Darwin, was actually coined by Herbert Spencer and Social Darwinists who wished to justify class and race superiority. A lesser known fact is that Darwin’s work is best described with the phrase “survival of the kindest.” Indeed in The Descent of Man and Selection In Relation to Sex, Darwin argued for “the greater strength of the social or maternal instincts than that of any other instinct or motive.” In another passage, he comments that “communities, which included the greatest number of the most sympathetic members, would flourish best, and rear the greatest number of offspring.” Compassion may indeed be a naturally evolved and adaptive trait. Without it, the survival and flourishing of our species would have been unlikely.

http://www.psychologicalscience.org.../2013/may-june-13/the-compassionate-mind.html

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

If someone is subhuman, how can they be culpable for their own condition?

I answered that pages ago and pages before that and even in the original thread so many years ago.

They accept that they will never be anything other than what they are or they surrender themselves to others as chattel rather for religious gain in another world or for the temporal gain of living upon the fruits of someone else's labor. This is what renders them less than human.

When you and others keep insisting on using the word subhuman, you are trying to connote that I see them as nonhuman and then you are justified at feeling outrage and engaging in all sorts and manner of personal attack. As I just pointed out, you seem to take much more pleasure in this than in the elevation of people and ideas that you actually like.

Meanwhile, when presented with the real deal, you ignore it.

It is the ugly step-child of your efforts to get the minds right of those who simply see things differently than you do. Your moral judgement causes you to do this.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

So let's talk about flaws. Such as having no compassion.



http://www.psychologicalscience.org.../2013/may-june-13/the-compassionate-mind.html

There is also, is there not the phenomenon in this information age of simply being overwhelmed by the unending daily calls to compassion and charity which leads to a feeling of helplessness to do something about everything and then a cynicism towards those who generationally do nothing to help themselves being lumped in with those who are actually engaged in improving their lot which is the why in the original thread of the comparison between Haiti and the Dominican Republic.

Our aid to the DR was actually aid that was put to good use.

Our aid to Haiti only made us feel better about visiting the only thing that ever actually got rebuilt, the resorts.

Then we simply forgot about Haiti, but we surely remember that several posters were somewhat indifferent to their fate for having recognized reality, both with the Haitian population and the alligator-tear liberal population. When was the last time you saw a thread here calling attention to the fact that Haiti is still an ongoing humanitarian disaster?

It would seem that for all of everyone's protestations, that you are all pretty much as callous as I, yet for taking me to task, you are somehow sated with the belief that, at least, you are better than me. However, I do not see it for the reason that I have stated repeatedly and which spawned this thread.

 

[Queersetti]

I answered that pages ago and pages before that and even in the original thread so many years ago.

They accept that they will never be anything other than what they are or they surrender themselves to others as chattel rather for religious gain in another world or for the temporal gain of living upon the fruits of someone else's labor. This is what renders them less than human.

When you and others keep insisting on using the word subhuman, you are trying to connote that I see them as nonhuman and then you are justified at feeling outrage and engaging in all sorts and manner of personal attack. As I just pointed out, you seem to take much more pleasure in this than in the elevation of people and ideas that you actually like.

Meanwhile, when presented with the real deal, you ignore it.

It is the ugly step-child of your efforts to get the minds right of those who simply see things differently than you do. Your moral judgement causes you to do this.

Your claim that the Haitian people meekly accept their conditions and make no effort to improve their lot in life is just false. They don't so so in a way that you approve of, and so you dismiss them. Some people think you do so out of racism. I don't. I think you are blinded by your adherence to an outdated and parochial ideology.

 

[cjh]

No. Your point was that people did not merit help because they were not as "advanced" as you in their understanding the economic theory in which you believe. That they deserved the havoc that a natural disaster wreaked upon them. That they deserved no help in returning their lives to normal.

Your response evidenced the lack of a fundamental human quality: compassion.

It was a less than human response.

No judgment. Just an observation.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Your claim that the Haitian people meekly accept their conditions and make no effort to improve their lot in life is just false. They don't so so in a way that you approve of, and so you dismiss them. Some people think you do so out of racism. I don't. I think you are blinded by your adherence to an outdated and parochial ideology.

How much money have you sent to save the Haitians recently?

How soon did their 15-minutes of compassion and call to action last with you?

There's grand theories and dreams and then there is stark, unblinking reality and that is what my belief system is rooted in.

Now, I must go earn my taxable income to do my part to ease the suffering of the world...



Maybe by this evening, this will have hit 25 pages.

Hate is more popular than love.

Easier too.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

No. Your point was that people did not merit help because they were not as "advanced" as you in their understanding the economic theory in which you believe. That they deserved the havoc that a natural disaster wreaked upon them. That they deserved no help in returning their lives to normal.

Your response evidenced the lack of a fundamental human quality: compassion.

It was a less than human response.

No judgment. Just an observation.

Non-responsive counselor.

Rephrase your post without the ascription.