The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Free Speech (32 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..11~12~13~14~15 [Next]
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5017 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
most are just like the ones you've already answered

Exactly.
If a person says to you that they like all kinds of magic, it is time-wasting to ask coin magic? card magic? illusions? What about close-up? and so on.

Now perhaps you'll answer the one question I have asked many times and received no inkling of a reason from you as to why you have faith that discrimination and inequality would not increase if private businesses were allowed to discriminate.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5017 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
"what shred of evidence do you have that even suggests that allowing businesses to discriminate against customers and employees has ever improved societal relations anywhere, any time?"
None.
I don't believe I've claimed to have any.


I see, so fifty years of progress should be overturned based on a prediction of puppies and rainbows that you have no reason to believe would actually happen.

Quote:
However, I have claimed that it is obvious that if person X is forced out of business for refusing to do Y, then by removing the compulsion to do Y would prevent more people X's from being forced out of business.
Please name all these people forced out of business, who could in no way continue if they so chose, because of compulsion. Please show that these people are more numerous and have suffered deeper harm than historically oppressed peoples in the last fifty years. Please show that removing restrictions benefits more than keeping in place.
Terrible Wizard
View Profile
Inner circle
1973 Posts

Profile of Terrible Wizard
Thanks for taking a few minutes to respond - I'm sorry I had to badger you repeatedly this to happen, but I'm glad you did.

Let me parse out your responses in an easier to read format, with my comments in brackets:

1) Should the law force private hotels to rent rooms to black people, yes or no? Yes
2) Should the law force a bakery to make a gay wedding cake, yes or no? What is gay cake (I notice you didn't read the question)
3) Should the law force a Jewish sign writer to make posters for a Nazi rally, yes or no? What sign (did you read the question?)
4) Should public institutions be allowed to use affirmative action hiring systems to increase their racial diversity, yes or no? Yes
5) Should private businesses be allowed to have racial quotas even for white people, yes or no? ill-formed: whites are not a people historically oppressed because of race in US and UK (This is not an answer)

6) Should publicly funded colleges cave readily to the hecklers veto to deplatform controversial speakers, yes or no? biased framing (this is not an answer)
7) Should the law force public officials to use people's preferred pronouns, yes or no? No
8) Should the law force everyone to use people's preferred pronouns, yes or no? No
9) Should there be hate speech laws which criminalise homophobic, Islamophobic or racist language, yes or no? No
10) Should the law force private businesses to allow self-identifying women to use the women's restroom, yes or no? undecided (which way do you lean?)

11) If businesses were allowed to discriminate, would things quickly revert to a pre-civil rights era level of bigotry, yes or no? Yes
12) Do non-whites face serious systemic racist discrimination in the USA and the U.K., yes or no? Read the data (that's not an answer, but I'll assume it means yes)
13) Should non-whites recieve financial reparations for historic abuses, yes or no? Depends (intriguing, could you add more?)
14) Are most white people unconsciously racist, yes or no? Read the research (this is not an answer, I'll have to assume you mean yes)
15) Can non-whites be racist in the US or UK, yes or no? Read the data (this is not an answer, I'll have to assume you mean no)

16) Should public institutions have gender quotas as part of their hiring policies, yes or no? Depends (on what?)
17) Are women paid less than men in the US and UK, yes or no? Read the data (not an answer, I'll assume you mean yes)
18) Are all men unconsciously sexist, yes or no? Read the research (not an answer, I'll assume you mean yes)
19) Should companies be allowed to fire staff for sexist speech, yes or no? Depends (on what?)
20) Is saying that men and women in general have different strengths and weaknesses, abilities and preferences, sexist, yes or no? Depends (on what?)

21) Do you think equal access to speaking should mean equal access to all media, from pamphlets to TV ads to tee-shirts designs to sports sponsorship to cinema product placement to time in government debates to books printed to .... Etc.? Yes (so you believe everyone should be paid exactly the same?)

22) Do you realise how prevalent the viewpoint the majority here represents actually is? Assumes facts not evidence (what?)

23) Do you only read a certain small section of news sources or talk to only a small subgroup of insiders? No

24) Who is being pulled down if I afford exactly the same rights to everyone? Those with less power presently (can you be more specific?)

25) Why should that law exist? What law? (in the US if you say Blacks cannot be served in your restaurant, you can and should be subject to the full measure of the law)

26) Which news sources do you use? come over to my house and you can track my media consumption (or you could just tell me?)

27) Have I been arguing for a more fair society? no, assumes facts not in evidence and lumps together disparate issues (then why did you imply I had been?)

28) What alternative would you forward to remove the problems currently faced regarding religious people being forced out of the public sphere, hate speech crime enforcement, academic de-platforming, affirmative action racism, and the such like? Or are you content with the status quo? Irrelevent (so you have no answers and think other people's suffering is irrelevant. Ok.)

29) All the supermarkets in the country refuse to sell me a cake? And all the bakers too? irrelevant and never said such (You asked 'what if the supermarket refused'. Seems my follow up question here was directly relevant. I'll have to assume your answer as 'yes')

30) You think that I won't be able to find a baker who is willing to bake me a wedding cake in the UK if I'm black, or gay, or Muslim? irrelevant and never said such (of course it's relevant, and how can your response to a question be 'never said such' - I'm asking you for an answer! I'll have to assume the answer is 'yes')

31) Please name the group who you think this would happen to? Be specific. - deeply wrong precisely because all things are not equal (what?)

32) You simply asked if I thought I'd have had advantages if I was non-white, and I said all other things being equal, yes (please read my posts). Where's the grievance? same question you already asked and I never said such (I think your response here was actually to the question below. You missed this one, then)

33) Are you telling me that a gay couple would have trouble getting a wedding cake in NY city? Do you think any gay couple would ever have a problem getting a cake in anywhere in the UK? same question you already asked and I never said such (given your responses so far it is fair I assume you mean, 'yes' and 'yes')

34) What about them? I can get a gay cake as easy as I can pick up a phone, but where can they live according to their consciences? who is they (those who want to refuse people service according to their conscience)

35) What legal discrimination do they face? Please tell me what laws and state institutional discrimination they face so I can stand with you against it. who is they?; who is they--if gays, in housing and employment (no, not gays, the students who you said faced discrimination almost every day)

36) Name a specific bigoted town. I'll see what Google throws up about the businesses and services it has etc. Then we'll check and see how hard it is to get a gay cake there. Deal? never said such (that response makes no sense in response to my question? Huh?)

37) I see you have not taken me up on my experiment. Is that an admission that there is no town in the US where a gay couple would be unable to obtain a wedding cake? never said such (that is not a meaningful response to my question - it literally makes no sense???)

38) I also note that you haven't specified the discrimination your students suffered under. Does this mean it doesn't actually exist? Please specify so I can believe you slurs, police harassment, physical intimidation (this was a follow up to the above question 35, thus 'discrimination' referenced legal, state institutional laws and the such lie, not just people being mean to them or criminal acts performed on their persons. So I ask again, what legal institutional discrimination do they face? I may have to assume 'none')

I'll collate/summarise your responses in another post.

Your other posts:
"Now perhaps you'll answer the one question". When you typed this I had already answered. I've asked you before to be more careful reading my posts.

"fifty years of progress should be overturned based on a prediction of puppies and rainbows"
It's hardly a prediction ... It's a logic argument. Where is the fallacy: if person X is forced out of business for refusing to do Y, then by removing the compulsion to do Y would prevent more people X's from being forced out of business.

"Please name all these people forced out of business"
I'll dig out some examples for you when I get chance.

"Please show that these people are more numerous and have suffered deeper harm than historically oppressed peoples in the last fifty years"
They haven't. But that doesn't matter, I'm not arguing that because someone suffered last year some other innocent party now has to suffer - is that your argument? It sounds illogical and vindictive, but it would explain some of the bullying tactics I've seen being used by feminists, BLM and the LGBT activists against others. They were discriminated against in the past, so now they want to make others suffer as well. Interesting psychological premise, but I'm not sure I buy it. Is this your view, landmark?

"Please show that removing restrictions benefits more than keeping in place."
I only need to argue that by removing restrictions those who want to discriminate will no longer be forced out to cease trading according to their consciences.
Terrible Wizard
View Profile
Inner circle
1973 Posts

Profile of Terrible Wizard
Collation:

6 out of 20 yes/no questions actually answered with either a yes or no.
2 questions not read
1 question missed

Summary of landmark's beliefs based on question responses:

Current anti-discrimination laws need to be maintained else we'll return to a pre-civil rights era level of bigotry; no need to introduce proscribed speech or hate speech laws; affirmative action and quotas are generally a good thing for historically oppressed people; non-whites face serious systemic, legal and institutional discrimination; non-whites could deserve reparations; most white people are racist, non-whites cannot be racist; most men are sexist; women are generally paid less than men; it could potentially be sexist to say men and women are different; the problems of religious people being unable to operate businesses according to their conscience is a minor irrelevance; whites have clear advantages in society over all non-whites; gay people still find it difficult to get access to goods and services.

Is that a reasonable summary, landmark? I've tried to be as fair as I can based upon your answers.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27137 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On Dec 7, 2017, landmark wrote:
...filed a federal lawsuit today arguing that an Arizona law requiring ...


Senator Kennedy mentioned something in our law that could pertain to this topic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstention_doctrine

what do you think?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5017 Posts

Profile of landmark
2,3)

I read the questions and repeat: what is a gay cake and what sign? Poorly defined question. As I've said at least four times now, it depends what is on the cake and on the sign. If it's the same cake or sign made for others (not gay, not Nazi), then yes they must sell it. Otherwise no. Do you think four re-statements of my position are enough?

5) Of course it's an answer. What it was not, was a well-formed question. A question that only allows answers A or B, when C is an obvious alternative is a poor question. Who do you think was the best US President ever--Millard Fillmore or Grover Cleveland?

6) When did you stop beating your wife?

10) I would have to discuss it more with people who consider themselves trans, and people who have been active fighting for women's rights. There's an interesting and not small split among people I respect who consider the concept of transgenderism in very different ways. So not leaning, but wanting more information.

12, 14, 15, 17) Don't assume, instead read my answer. It means exactly what it says.

13) Not all non-white groups have faced the same levels of oppression, and it's also not clear that specifically financial reparations are the best way to make reparations.

19) level of offense, frequency of offense.

20) depends on what specifically is said. It could be accurate or it could be stupid BS.

21)? Where did I say that?

22) The premise of the question is unproven.

24) read my posts

26) far too numerous

29-37) read my posts. I said I had no doubt that there would be towns where these things would be very difficult to get if you repealed the Civil Rights Amendments as you wished to do.

38) You obviously have a comprehension or empathy problem. Slurs, police harassment and physical intimidation are not "none." It's pretty clear to me that you have no intention of a real dialogue but just want to hear what you want to hear.

Quote:
"fifty years of progress should be overturned based on a prediction of puppies and rainbows"
It's hardly a prediction ... It's a logic argument. Where is the fallacy: if person X is forced out of business for refusing to do Y, then by removing the compulsion to do Y would prevent more people X's from being forced out of business.


The logic is faulty on about every level. 1) The premise is faulty--nobody is forcing anyone out of business. The businessperson is making a clear and free choice to do so. 2) It ignores the consequences of the policy. It's true that by putting a serial killer in prison I deprive him of his freedom. But a much larger segment of the society is benefited. "It's hardly a prediction..." is quite right. The normal way to make predictions of policies is to look at how such policy fared in the past, not to completely ignore history.

Quote:
"Please show that these people are more numerous and have suffered deeper harm than historically oppressed peoples in the last fifty years"
They haven't. But that doesn't matter,
Of course it does, if your solution would continue to bring more harm to others. Just what kind of blinders do you wear?

Quote:
"Please show that removing restrictions benefits more than keeping in place."
I only need to argue that by removing restrictions those who want to discriminate will no longer be forced out to cease trading according to their consciences.

I'm sorry to say this, I rarely do, but this is a deeply stupid statement. Surely you know better than this. Every policy must be weighed as to its benefit and consequences. If the negative consequences outweigh the benefits, no matter what the policy, then it is a bad policy.

I'm done here. This is not a useful dialogue but an inquisition. I've humored you with answers to questions that get repeated over and over until you are either happy with the answers or can distort them to your liking.
Terrible Wizard
View Profile
Inner circle
1973 Posts

Profile of Terrible Wizard
Well, OK then.

I'm sorry that these issues and my point of view have triggered you so much that you've responded in such an insulting fashion. I wish this wasn't par for the course when talking to SJWs and cultural Marxists, but I'm afraid it is Smile

Hopefully you will at least reconsider some of your principles and positions, and maybe this dialogue has helped you formulate your own thoughts so as to be better able to express them. I have enjoyed our chat and found it profitable, and it's helped me think through some things - so cheers for that Smile. Ultimately, though, I think you're right that liberals/ conservatives/ libertarians will never be able to have productive dialogue with leftists/ progressives/ social justice collectivists - their worldviews are too divergent; mockery might be the only really useful speech to direct at each other, and it will finally come down to power and who has it.

Does anyone else want to discuss landmarks viewpoint?
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3465 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On Dec 15, 2017, landmark wrote:
Who do you think was the best US President ever--Millard Fillmore or Grover Cleveland?

Silly example: everybody knows that Grover Cleveland was the best US President ever. Which other US President has a Hall of Fame pitcher named for him?
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5017 Posts

Profile of landmark
Willie Clinton Mays?

I like that the Wikipedia entry for GC Alexander says "Not to be confused with Grover Cleveland." I can just imagine the enormous GC running the bases.
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3465 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On Dec 16, 2017, landmark wrote:
Willie Clinton Mays?

Willie Howard Mays was born 15 years before Bill Clinton; I'm pretty sure that you cannot be named after someone before whom you were born.

Also: if memory serve, Willie Mays wasn't a pitcher. I could be mistaken.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27137 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On Dec 16, 2017, Terrible Wizard wrote:
... to discuss landmarks viewpoint?


I'm not clear on his - and it's tough enough to examine my own.

PC speech and "fairness"/quota managing are expensive economic inefficiencies. Such additional costs risk making history a burden more heavy than the market will bear.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
NYCTwister
View Profile
Loyal user
267 Posts

Profile of NYCTwister
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20533 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
So what is the real story and what is over reaction?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
NYCTwister
View Profile
Loyal user
267 Posts

Profile of NYCTwister
Quote:
On Dec 16, 2017, Dannydoyle wrote:
So what is the real story and what is over reaction?


I guess the real story is the curtailment of expression, in such a way that you have to wonder......why?

On the surface it's so monumentally stupid, and obviously biased that, by now, you might just shrug it off as today's dose of nonsense.

But when you think about how effective this joke of an administration has been, you have to think of fourth dimensional chess.
This moron has the whole world punch drunk. He understands something about the "common" man that thinking people refuse to accept.

I guess an over-reaction would be - "THEY'RE ATTACKING SCIENCE!! TAKE TO THE STREETS!!" - or some dumb **** like that.
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20533 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
I still think that there is more to this.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
NYCTwister
View Profile
Loyal user
267 Posts

Profile of NYCTwister
I'd like to know what it is; because on the surface...it's disturbing.

Why those words?

And...banned on government documents?

Orwell is doing a spit take right about now.
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20533 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
It is CNN. It is possible it might not be all to the story.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
NYCTwister
View Profile
Loyal user
267 Posts

Profile of NYCTwister
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27137 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On Dec 16, 2017, Dannydoyle wrote:
I still think that there is more to this.


If you put topical sentences using those terms together - what drops out of the grammar? Try this:
* based -> considered opinion + as born + traditional values ...
And a new theme song "in consideration with community standards and wishes" appears for 2018 campaigns.

Gotta love unapproved anonymous sources - just doing their jobs.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Terrible Wizard
View Profile
Inner circle
1973 Posts

Profile of Terrible Wizard
Governments banning words? Sounds sinister. You're beginning to look a bit more like Europe ... Smile
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Free Speech (32 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..11~12~13~14~15 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.32 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL