gina rex

I understand where @bellerose is coming from because that was my exact first reaction too. It seems better that someone works through stuff than it is magically removed.

However, given the button is magical and therefore could not only remove belief in God but any memory of that belief I would do it. Everyone would then be free to re-form that…[Read more]

Davis wrote:No…this falacy applies to debate on a particular topic (which is not under debate here). It does not apply when considering the weight of someone’s opinion in a decision making process, as a leader or as a representative (as opposed to proving that someone is objectively correct or not). If someone is unreliable or is known not to act…

[Read more]

Davis wrote:
And so…outing someone who works against your interests within a group is okay…but outing someone outside of your group who works against your interests is not okay. I can see how this might be fair…but perhaps you can explain why?

To be clear, I was thinking of the case where someone is pretending to be in Group A, is working with…[Read more]

I agree. Prejudism is a learned trait whatever the subject matter. I was just trying to clarify a confusing statement 🙂

I understand what he is trying to say. You cannot choose to be gay but you can choose to be a homophobic-homosexual. You can choose to be an activist against racism but you can also choose to be a secretly-racist activist against racism. The first part in each phrase doesn’t matter…it’s the latter part that does. The difference (per the first…[Read more]

@Davis. Re your huh?, I was also busy huffing, but I had another read of Unseens comments and I realize he is simply pointing out that racism and being gay aren’t comparable in that we believe we are born with our sexual orientation, whereas we learn racism.

Any attack based on hypocricy is ipso facto an ad hominem tu quoque. In other words, “You say one thing but do the opposite.”

No…this falacy applies to debate on a particular topic (which is not under debate here). It does not apply when considering the weight of someone’s opinion in a decision making process, as a leader or as a rep…[Read more]

Davis wrote:It is true that there are a portion of self-hating homosexuals who believe they don’t deserve the rights that everyone else does. The only thing is…the record of outed politicians who admit that they are gay and then move on to champion gay rights is pretty high. Randy Boehning is but the most recent example.

The end justifies the mea…[Read more]

Just read Davis’s reply to this, and he brought up some scenarios, completely different from outing a hypocritical bible thumper (the situation I had in mind when I wrote the above), where outing is not only appropriate but downright necessary (e.g., exposing an enemy agent of influence in your ranks).

And so…outing someone who works against y…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:In other words, simply because someone acts in a way inconsistent with their stated beliefs, it doesn’t follow that those beliefs are wrong.

Your paraphrasing is off target. Who is claiming discrimination against LGBT people is wrong simply because the discriminator is hypocritical? I hold that discrimination against LGBT people is h…[Read more]