Other Controversial Topics

[Imperator_tenebrae]

I don't personally carry a gun, but I do carry a 6 inch knife under my clothes. The day it saved me from three guys who were circling me like wolves will never leave my memory. I was later told that I should have called for help or something... but 1. they were too close, 2. phones take a while to unlock, and 3. nobody would have heard me.A weapon is more valuable than those who have never needed one realize.

Have you taken any self defense classes? If you can fend off three guys with a knife then that's pretty good and you're very fortunate to have it with you.

I'm not taking anything away from knives since I have quite a collection myself and yet to me a gun is more of a deterrence. I recommend CWP if you can afford the time and money to get it.

 

[Rachael of the Shire]

Have you taken any self defense classes? If you can fend off three guys with a knife then that's pretty good and you're very fortunate to have it with you.

I'm not taking anything away from knives since I have quite a collection myself and yet to me a gun is more of a deterrence. I recommend CWP if you can afford the time and money to get it.

Might not be able to manage that but will keep it in consideration. Thanks for the tip.

 

[The Gunrunner]

I stand my ground.

Sobered up faster than I thought.

Why? It's not impressive for someone to respond to arguments and counter-arguments with what is essentially "I believe I'm right anyway." Your position supports a legal change that I see as unjustifiable and thusfar I've given better reason for it to be ignored than followed. Do you disagree with my reasoning? Did I come off too strong and you don't want to discuss it anymore? Option 3: Other? I didn't say I was against firearms, just the specific arguments and the most anti idea counter to gun control - That is, the idea literally all weapons should be fair game.

If you're going to decide you're right anyway, fine. I don't understand or agree, but alright. However, it doesn't benefit you or act as a detriment to me, nor does it convince anyone else reading these posts you're correct. I'll post two things out of a prediction:

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe
Which has other articles on it, though citations are at the bottom.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg's_stages_of_moral_development
Which also suggests how one's ability to reason and argue develop.

Because I think the more one understands why they do something, the more self-aware they become and the easier it is for them to change. Yeah, it's a pretty cocky move... buuuut so was what you did.

 

[Rachael of the Shire]

It's not that I completely disrespect all those that disagree with me.

It is that I do not see the value in arguing with people who form their opinions based on The Oatmeal, or other sources that do not involve feeling cold, hard reality.

With that, I stand my ground. God bless.

 

[The Gunrunner]

Think I'll need that cardboard box now.

 

[Imperator_tenebrae]

Sobered up faster than I thought.

Why? It's not impressive for someone to respond to arguments and counter-arguments with what is essentially "I believe I'm right anyway." Your position supports a legal change that I see as unjustifiable and thusfar I've given better reason for it to be ignored than followed. Do you disagree with my reasoning? Did I come off too strong and you don't want to discuss it anymore? Option 3: Other? I didn't say I was against firearms, just the specific arguments and the most anti idea counter to gun control - That is, the idea literally all weapons should be fair game.

People have become so entrenched in their own beliefs these days and the toxic atmosphere of the internet comes off pretentious by default (especially by SJW crybullies) so it is only natural people from the middle or right side of the field to stay in their trenches. When the ideological battlefield is so divisive that even legit -or in this case- serious sources are used in an argument one side will declare the information as propaganda or severely biased because it does not fit their echo chamber view of the world. So why bother?

I'll be blunt and say having your opinions based on a webcomic is not only moronic -just like the people who watch Colbert for news- I'll go further to say I don't think you have the right to bitch about someone not budging on the argument if they feel that way in their own right mind.

Do not conform to anothers' opinion until you are ready to change it by your own accord. Look at all possible view points then make your own conclusions whether they're right or wrong and stand your ground. If they don't like your conclusions, then fuck em. People are fickle enough as it is, about high time people are starting to dig in and starting to show some backbone in this political correct shithole we found ourselves in.

I have the one shot rule. You got one shot to make a dent in their own argument and defenses then if you can't make them budge, fall back and regroup and leave it be.

 

[The Gunrunner]

People have become so entrenched in their own beliefs these days and the toxic atmosphere of the internet comes off pretentious by default (especially by SJW crybullies) so it is only natural people from the middle or right side of the field to stay in their trenches. When the ideological battlefield is so divisive that even legit -or in this case- serious sources are used in an argument one side will declare the information as propaganda or severely biased because it does not fit their echo chamber view of the world. So why bother?

I'll be blunt and say having your opinions based on a webcomic is not only moronic -just like the people who watch Colbert for news- I'll go further to say I don't think you have the right to bitch about someone not budging on the argument if they feel that way in their own right mind.

Do not conform to anothers' opinion until you are ready to change it by your own accord. Look at all possible view points then make your own conclusions whether they're right or wrong and stand your ground. If they don't like your conclusions, then fuck em. People are fickle enough as it is, about high time people are starting to dig in and starting to show some backbone in this political correct shithole we found ourselves in.

I have the one shot rule. You got one shot to make a dent in their own argument and defenses then if you can't make them budge, fall back and regroup and leave it be.

That's actually a bit of what the backfire effect is about. As for the rest, I don't really know what to say? You mention that serious sources are being used and ignored, but ignored mine and the person you seem to like here didn't use any. Are you talking about the feminist debate, or this one? Then with the echo chamber, wouldn't the one-try rule and just accepting that people won't change their minds support echo chambers? Every time someone presents their beliefs, it is presented to anyone able to hear or read it. My own rule is that if it's presented with any intent to change a mind, you're free to respond to it. By doing that, you are antagonizing the chance of an echo chamber wherever you do so.

It's not based on a webcomic, it's one of the things that mentions it. "Which has other articles on it, though citations are at the bottom," was used. The citations that caused him to make it are at the bottom. It's a simple explanation of a psychological concept. There was also the ladder of morality, which is being ignored for some reason... hm. I also need to bring up that this was about an obvious bias being presented. It had nothing to do with the gun control arguments at all, and bringing it up with that context is irrelevent. Though you may not be bringing it up in this way, I do feel the other person did.
I also did say that she can feel however she wants, but it's unjustified and it's to her interests that she doesn't do that without justification. Those links were in case those behaviours/events were applicable so she was aware of them.

Sure, and if an argument is better than all you have to present then it is logical for you to change your mind, and illogical for you not to. If they don't like my conclusions, that doesn't make them bad people but if they can't justify themselves then there's nothing wrong with pointing that out. Humans change their minds, but they can also develop biases and bigotries which make it harder. The backfire effect is one example of a bias, which is why it was brought up. As for the backbone, there's nothing brave about refusing to change your mind... did you really just argue that? Because you did also say that you should go 'fuck em' if they don't like your conclusions. I do agree with the exposure, but then you said to make your conclusions whether they're right or wrong? ... This got a like from someone?

I changed from Christian to atheist, anti-feminist to feminist, etc. None of it was from one argument, it was from listening to the various arguments and counter-arguments that were there. I changed from anti-feminist, changed my mind on transgenderism, had reason to turn away from the idea of gender egalitarianism, found the speakers I listened to were unreliable, and got why 'humanist' wasn't a workable alternative either. There's various Christian arguments which were used in the past that I'd continuously gotten more counter on as I looked into it more and more, until I went "Yeah, alright, fair point." Challenging a core belief takes time, depending on the person. Right and left ideas can often be the cause of surroundings; that is, a lot of people reinforcing an idea, and one argument isn't going to change that most of the time. My rule is that if someone promotes an idea, then you can challenge it. Thats just fair play.

 

[Grouse]

• Abortion: Pro-choice right until the third trimester (given mother's life is not in danger), where the fetus has a relatively high chance of surviving the abortion (in which case, the one performing the abortion has to actively, you know, kill it out of the womb in order to have a successful 'abortion).
• The Death Penalty: No. The justice system is not perfect. Those doomed to be on death row may actually turn out to be innocent -- and such a thing has happened multiple times before. Just look at Steven Avery/Brendan Dassey.
• Animal Testing: Go for it. Research proposals have to go through an ethics board/committee anyway that ensures animal cruelty will be minimised.
• Is Sexual Orientation Determined at Birth? It's more complicated than that. I do believe it's some complex combination of biology and environment (so no), BUT the bottom-line is does it really matter? As long as it's two consenting adults, who gives a shit?
• Should Churches Remain Exempt from Taxes? No. Shit like that is how you get Scientology. Come on, peoples.
• Gun Control Very much for it. Before I get any Murican pitchforks coming at me (see previous posts on this thread), I do believe that this issue is also highly dependent on cultural context. For example, it's probably not wise to suddenly enforce such strict gun control laws in a place like the US. Try it, and you'll just get a massive shit storm. Baby steps, as they say. I am surprised people from there can buy firearms without so much as a background check though.
• Drinking Age (raised, lowered, remain the same?) Don't care. Young people are going to be young people, man. They're going to do stupid shit.
• Euthanasia Yes, provided that the patient has been made aware of any alternative treatments (and they refuse to try them), and they go through an extensive psychiatric check-up first to make sure that this isn't some temporary wish they will regret later.
• Medical Recreational Marijuana Seriously, it's just like alcohol. I'm not one of those potheads pretending it's some kind of wonder drug. I concede weed has negative effects as well (particularly on short-term memory), but it doesn't deserve to be on Schedule I LMAO. Talk about Reefer Madness. At least legalising it would actually add funds for the government to use.
• Prostitution Better to legalise it. Again, that sweet, sweet tax money, amirite? Besides, this way it's easier to regulate it. Have the hookers get STD/HIV tests on the regular, make sure they're of age or psychologically competent for work. Hell, I would love to see an official hooker union. They deserve it!
• Tattoos and Piercings in the Workplace Is this even controversial anymore?
• Standardised Tests Not sure what this means. Standardised testing is important to some degree -- as long as they are specific to a field (like the MCAT, LSAT, GREs, etc.) but I think more important is to get rid of the idea that there's one type of 'smart'
• Bonus: Religious Standing (why/why don't you believe in what you believe?) I'm an atheist, and yes, once upon a time, I was that asshole atheist, but now I don't care, and people should be able to believe what they believe. Just stop ringing my doorbell so you can talk to me about Jesus, please. One 'No thank you' should be enough. JEHOVA'S WITNESSES, I'M LOOKING AT YOU.