Facebook HATE GROUP

[2322]

No way, i'm not even gonna try it on for size, i hate pink!!!, but you think so? :biggrin1:

So long as it's the certain shade of men's pink ala something like Thomas Pink. Dark-haired guys look great in pink. It also gives your face color and helps define your features. Light-haired guys have a more difficult time as it tends to make them look a little too washed out or makes their faces look flushed if they're gingers. Pink is very masculine.

As for the rest, I hope you reconsider your position. If you think you're the arbiter of what is good and evil then you have to wonder just what all those people who die in the name of Allah are thinking. Evil people never think they're evil. They think they're doing good and, if a few suffer for that good, well then that's the cost of doing good.

Throughout history every side thinks they're the good guys.

 

[798686]

Throughout history every side thinks they're the good guys.

True - but surely there must be some universal standards that you can measure things against?
Like treating ppl with decency and respect and not deliberately fostering hate - or needlessly attacking?

I know most things need to be questioned, and there need to be checks and balances and stuff, and also the opportunity to disagree, and poke fun at things. But surely certain behaviour should be condemned?

 

[B_Nick8]

Of course you are! I'm not sure signing a petition will influence the Nazis much. I think they have an idea that most people find them repulsive.

I'm not attempting to influence the Nazis, Jason. I think they're far beyond my even my considerable persuasive abilities.

My "petition" reference was directed at the reporting of the Hate People Who Look Gay group as being offensive...to me. I consider it the online equivalent of signing a petition. What FaceBook does or does not choose to do with it, as a privately owned entity, is not up to me but I will register my disapproval of that little group, and strongly. If it results in them being shut down, I'm delighted. It is, to me, little different than me pulling my advertising dollars from a television show whose sponsors advocate anti-gay policies, and encouraging everyone I know--regardless of individual sexuality--to do the same. My rights to free speech and protest, as you and HG would be the first to admit, are paramount. If the results of those serve my purpose, so much the better.

 

[mitchymo]

As for the rest, I hope you reconsider your position. If you think you're the arbiter of what is good and evil then you have to wonder just what all those people who die in the name of Allah are thinking. Evil people never think they're evil. They think they're doing good and, if a few suffer for that good, well then that's the cost of doing good.

Throughout history every side thinks they're the good guys.

I see no need to rethink my position, my position is based on thinking to begin with and makes perfect sense to me.

Is what person A doing hurtful to anyone, disrespectful to anyone, potentially? no? then that cannot be bad.

Is what person B doing hurting etc etc, then that cannot be good.

 

[HazelGod]

But surely certain behaviour should be condemned?

That's what we've been trying to impress to people about the double-edged nature of free expression...if you feel certain opinions should be condemned, then you are free to do so. Not everyone will agree with you, however, on what deserves condemnation and what does not. It's better to allow the marketplace of ideas to police itself than attempt to implement any direct control over the expression of thought.

 

[mitchymo]

That's what we've been trying to impress to people about the double-edged nature of free expression...if you feel certain opinions should be condemned, then you are free to do so. Not everyone will agree with you, however, on what deserves condemnation and what does not. It's better to allow the marketplace of ideas to police itself than attempt to implement any direct control over the expression of thought.

Humans much like many animals are protective of their young and there loved ones. In order to protect them we dictate do's and don'ts. There is no difference between that and adults regulating their own social attitudes to the benefit of its citizens.
Claiming that it is policing thought is propaganda because its not the thought which is the crime but the action upon it. Not regulating social attitude leads to anarchy.

Also it is a last ditch effort of those whose outdated views are being pushed to the fringe to claim ironically that they are being surpressed to try and uphold their views.

 

[2322]

I see no need to rethink my position, my position is based on thinking to begin with and makes perfect sense to me.

That's what they all say. Really! It's what the bigots say, it's what the fundamentalists say, it's what the rationalists say, it's what everybody who thinks they're right says.

Is what person A doing hurtful to anyone, disrespectful to anyone, potentially? no? then that cannot be bad.

Is what person B doing hurting etc etc, then that cannot be good.

Most people might agree with you. Some will not. Are you harming anyone now by being who you are? By the thinking of some, you are. You set an open example of depravity, immorality, and in no way should anyone with your lifestyle be allowed to have contact with children or the weak minded. Your choice to be gay harms the social fabric of society by refusing to marry and have children with your wife. You mock the values of your society and seek to cause its downfall by recruiting others to be gay and do the same thing. Worse, you are an affront to God who has commanded that people such as you should not be allowed to live. You are an example of a decrepit and decadent western society created on the backs of weaker people around the globe whose resources you exploit and whose governments you control. You have simply replaced an empire with borders with an economic empire that conducts your immoral exploitation for you. As a people you have turned your back on God and so deserve retribution for your effrontery. That your people allow such a thing as you to even live is an example of how far they have fallen in the eyes of God and all righteous people.

I know this position is good because to defend God and his law are good. I know this position is good because nature says that male mates only with female, as God intended. I know this position will help people because it prevents them from hearing and being persuaded by your people and media. I know my position is right because what matters most is the welfare of the tribe, not the individual and what you are is something so foul that they must not even hear or see you.

Do you see where this goes?

Also it is a last ditch effort of those whose outdated views are being pushed to the fringe to claim ironically that they are being surpressed to try and uphold their views.

Well if you're censoring them then yeah, they are being suppressed. They're not wrong there!

 

[mitchymo]

That's what they all say. Really! It's what the bigots say, it's what the fundamentalists say, it's what the rationalists say, it's what everybody who thinks they're right says.

Someone IS going to be right tho, i fancy my chances however arrogant that may seem.

Most people might agree with you. Some will not. Are you harming anyone now by being who you are? By the thinking of some, you are. You set an open example of depravity, immorality, and in no way should anyone with your lifestyle be allowed to have contact with children or the weak minded. Your choice to be gay harms the social fabric of society by refusing to marry and have children with your wife. You mock the values of your society and seek to cause its downfall by recruiting others to be gay and do the same thing. Worse, you are an affront to God who has commanded that people such as you should not be allowed to live. You are an example of a decrepit and decadent western society created on the backs of weaker people around the globe whose resources you exploit and whose governments you control. You have simply replaced an empire with borders with an economic empire that conducts your immoral exploitation for you. As a people you have turned your back on God and so deserve retribution for your effrontery. That your people allow such a thing as you to even live is an example of how far they have fallen in the eyes of God and all righteous people.

I know this position is good because to defend God and his law are good. I know this position is good because nature says that male mates only with female, as God intended. I know this position will help people because it prevents them from hearing and being persuaded by your people and media. I know my position is right because what matters most is the welfare of the tribe, not the individual and what you are is something so foul that they must not even hear or see you.

Do you see where this goes?

The common denomination with these statements is their base in religious context. These are less believable than my arguments which have nothing to do with religion. They should have the moral highground but they don't because their humanity is subject to parameters that they cannot detach from. Except they could but choose not to.

Well if you're censoring them then yeah, they are being suppressed. They're not wrong there!

Well fortunately for them it is easier to think about what effect their beliefs have on others and seek to better themselves than it is for me to turn str8 or a black guy to try chinese for a new look. Sympathy = none.

 

[D_Portelay Porquesword]

Not done.

I refuse to do as i'm told.

You can administer suitable punishment as and when you are ready! :wink:

....waiting for you to bend over

 

[mitchymo]

....waiting for you to bend over

Hmmm, much more preferable to the odd one or two waiting for me to keel!

 

[2322]

Not all religious, there is the nature element as well plus your country's past history and our (western) culture.

Grounding in God or humanism, it's all relative. You're operating under the cultural fallacy that everyone thinks like you and anyone who doesn't is a backward hottentot or fuzzywuzzy. They don't think like you, don't have your cultural references, don't begin to understand your thought process. And I'm not talking people in far away places either, people who think like that are your neighbors. One of the most astonishing things people learn in life is that not everyone is as reasonable as I am. If you cannot understand that people are just as certain they're reasonable and right as you are, then you're not respecting them and that's dangerous. Never underestimate your adversary, always place yourself in their position. That's how you understand them and then use that information, inducted or deducted, to persuade your adversary of the truthfulness of your position.

How do you prove you're right to someone who won't even let you speak? How do they confront your ideas and beliefs and how do you defend them when you censor? You can't.

Well fortunately for them it is easier to think about what effect their beliefs have on others and seek to better themselves than it is for me to turn str8 or a black guy to try chinese for a new look. Sympathy = none.

Is it? You're not living under a government installed and kept in place by a western power. You're not living in a place with inestimable wealth where the great majority of people don't see a penny of it. You're not seeing people disappeared into the back of black marias in the night. You're not seeing the vast wealth of the west where everyone lives care-free on streets paved with gold. You're not seeing an imperialist war fought in your back yard. You're not seeing a millenias-old culture being marginalized by people like Ronald McDonald, Madonna, and Lady GaGa. You're not absolutely perfectly unquestionably certain that there is a God and one right way to worship him.

You're very certain that rationality, humanism, scientific process, and individual rights are what are inherently superior to anything else. Your education, society, media, and culture all work to reinforce those values just as surely as the other guy's does for him and yet you're both very certain that your way is better.

This is how shit starts.

The only way to dispel that shit is to allow the free exchange of ideas in a dialog based upon mutual respect.

 

[Tattooed Goddess]

I think its funny how people are like "What if we set up a group called "we hate HazelGod" the answer to that is: He probably wouldnt give a fuck.

What this comes down to is, there are some really sensitive people who would consider a thread about white people or whatever to be something to lose sleep over and feel lead to contact everyone they know about it.

We are in a world of hypersensitive people where being "nice" is everything. Even though they would go behind everyones back and start shit and stir the pot. As long as their actions appeared kind and well intended they are totally ok with it.

I, myself, would rather hear the truth from people rather than just see smiling faces all day. I'd never be one to say "Hey thats not nice of you" but i've seen more than my fair share of dramatic men say "lets all be kind to one another" and 2 minutes later get all bent out of shape and hateful with someone who doesnt agree with them. It's a complete double standard.

Some of us don't care of other people are nice or if we are perceived as nice all the time. It's just the way we are. You aren't going to change someone just because it makes you feel uncomfortable.

I dont care if super religious groups who believe that all birth control is wrong exists out there. I'm still going to do my thing. Do you really think shutting down a group on Facebook is going to make those people not hate gays or not have influence over people about gays? I think this has a lot more to do with some peoples need to control and feel power over something they don't agree with. On both sides.

I've seen my fair share of gays who discriminate, in fact i see them daily around here. It's all good if they do it, just no one else. It might make their sun stop shining if someone else does it.

 

[bek2335]

It is in fact possible to place a high premium on treating people well and still think that it's important to be able to disagree and/or be different. Those things don't need to be mutually exclusive.

 

[B_Nick4444]

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." Voltaire

my! how far lib ideology has taken us from the spirit of democracy and tolerance ... how sad!

 

[Gillette]

That's what we've been trying to impress to people about the double-edged nature of free expression...if you feel certain opinions should be condemned, then you are free to do so. Not everyone will agree with you, however, on what deserves condemnation and what does not. It's better to allow the marketplace of ideas to police itself than attempt to implement any direct control over the expression of thought.

We as individuals are the market and individuals of the market reporting the hate group is the way the market polices itself. The private entity, Facebook, is the only one with direct control. You're barking up the wrong tree.

The only way to dispel that shit is to allow the free exchange of ideas in a dialog based upon mutual respect.

Key word bolded.
What in that hate group implied respect of gays to you?

The problem with the anti-censorship argument with regard to hate groups is that it relies on each individual weighing what is said and reaching the right/rational/intelligent/balanced/educated conclusion about it. Have you taken a good look at your fellow man? There are entirely too many sheeple who are too lazy to do their own thinking and arrive at their own conclusions. The very fact that advertizing works is proof of this.

What starts as a small group spreading hate unchallenged becomes a larger group, and as they spread that hate unchallenged more sheeple will think, "hey, no one is objecting so it must be okay", and on it grows.

Apathy -> desensitization -> acceptance.

The nazi comparison is apt. It was the steadily increasing propaganda against the jews that made it possible to sway an entire nation into compliance with the holocaust.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

The two of you advocate doing nothing. Fie on you.

Kudos to those who reported it.

 

[HazelGod]

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." Voltaire

my! how far lib ideology has taken us from the spirit of democracy and tolerance ... how sad!

I'm not sure what "lib ideology" has to do with anything, but that's the quotation I always have in mind vis-à-vis free speech issues.

You're barking up the wrong tree.

I think you may have missed the point.

The two of you advocate doing nothing.

Yep, you totally missed the point.

 

[Tattooed Goddess]

I think what HazelGod and Jason are saying is that they arent advocates and some people need to be ok with that. Not everyone feels compelled to advocate or report everything they don't like.

Most minds are molded in childhood, if you are liking what you believe you are unlikely to feel differently just because someone reported you. I think thats the point from some people in this argument that advocacy, reporting and "standing as a front man" isnt in everyones nature. I see some groups that totally tear down someone who isnt in the front of the parade with them and how if they don't do what "they" would do to fight for rights that they must be against the rights all together.

I didn't feel compelled in the least to report it- why? For many reasons. One, maybe im just too lazy to create a facebook account just to report something someone else told me to do. Especially if i've had run ins with that particular person. Maybe it was the way someone brought it up. Maybe i would have if i already had an account on there. Who knows.

I highly doubt they would report large labia haters on Facebook if i were offended by it. I dont think that means anything. I think you could venture to say that 99% of lpsg didnt report it, so its not like we are all haters if we didnt do it.

Do i agree with that page, no not necessarily. But i think these guys have a lot more power in the lives of those around them and what can be done about that? Shutting down the facebook page is small potatoes and probably not stopping much of the hate in these peoples lives.

 

[Gillette]

Yep, you totally missed the point.

Clear it up then. You chastise people for reporting their objections to a facebook group. What are you advocating?

If it's posting discussion on the group page where others can read a balanced argument you may be forgetting that the group can delete any content they don't like, making such tactics an exercise in futility.

 

[HazelGod]

You chastise people for reporting their objections to a facebook group.

No, I didn't. Try again, with an eye toward the larger picture.

 

[Gillette]

I think what HazelGod and Jason are saying is that they arent advocates and some people need to be ok with that. Not everyone feels compelled to advocate or report everything they don't like.

I don't think that's what they're saying at all. Their posts read quite clearly as telling those who reported it they should be ashamed for being party to censorship.

I think you could venture to say that 99% of lpsg didnt report it, so its not like we are all haters if we didnt do it.

Nobody has said that those not reporting must ipso facto be supportive of the hate group.