3 ms·
Presumably because their behavior does not breach what the list maker deems acceptable. > After all, if they are being bullied because they are gay, all gay pe
by throwawaylinux 3y ago
Presumably because their behavior does not breach what the list maker deems acceptable.
> After all, if they are being bullied because they are gay, all gay people should be listed on there.
I don't know what you mean. That's not a gotcha.
- PartiallyTyped 3y ago> Presumably because their behavior does not breach what the list maker deems acceptable. So it’s not because they are gay, it’s their behaviour. I am glad we finally agreed though I am sad we had to spend as many steps to reach this conclusion.
- throwawaylinux 3y ago[flagged]
- PartiallyTyped 3y agoYou seem to have confused your insults and arrogance for insight. There's no ideology involved, only breaking the social contract and hurting others. I'd refer you to Scanlon.
- throwawaylinux 3y agoAlways funny to hear people making lists of minorities and undesirables defend themselves. None of what you're coming up with is new.
- PartiallyTyped 3y agoIt's not a list of minorities, it's also not a list of undesirables. Listing the actions of individuals has no inherent morality. The morality of the actions is decided by the broader society. You keep painting them as victims when the list is only outlining their actions. If you have done no harm, you have nothing to fear.
- throwawaylinux 3y agoThat's great, you keep saving the world one list of homosexuals at a time.
- PartiallyTyped 3y agoThe amount of strawmans and insults you have thrown should have been your wake-up call. As far as I am concerned, you are just another hypocrite, no different to the people in the list and this conversation is not worth it. Again, read up on contractualism.