Racism, Bigotry and Misogyny at TOL

[Angel4Truth]

You're responsible to yourself for the (careless) circumstances leading to his decision to steal your car.

yep, very good, i am suffering as a result partly of what i chose to do.

Though, how can you held be responsible for another person's action.

Here - like many others is where you went retarded.

No one said you are responsible for the crime. (other than crucible)

You're responsible for your actions; he's responsible for his. Don't conflate the two.

Simple really.

Then why dont you and many others get it yet, that THAT is what has been being said THE ENTIRE TIME SINCE LAST NOVEMBER.

:doh:

 

[Angel4Truth]

:first:

Hooray!

I know right, he finally gets what was said the entire time, hooray!

 

[Crucible]

A police officer is driving down the street on patrol. On one side of the street is a man beating another man and on the other is a man beating a woman. All other factors are equal.

Who should the officer try to assist first and why?

There's usually a low ceiling with how much assault a woman takes from a man in public. With men, that ceiling is much higher- men are much more likely to be mortally injured.

So, you tell me :idunno:

 

[quip]

Here - like many others is where you went retarded.

No one said you are responsible for the crime. (other than crucible)



Then why dont you and many others get it yet, that THAT is what has been being said THE ENTIRE TIME SINCE LAST NOVEMBER.

:doh:

Well, yes he did. It's conflation was implied by the very accusation...he never attempted the distinction.

He's simply backpedaling here.

 

[PureX]

You're responsible to yourself for the (careless) circumstances leading to his decision to steal your car. So, how can you held be responsible for another person's freewilled action?

You're responsible for your actions; he's responsible for his. Don't conflate the two.

Simple really.

The problem, here, is that the idea of assigning blame quickly runs amok among Christians, who think everything bad that ever happens to a person MUST BE a punishment from God for a sin of some kind. So that although a rape is the sin of the rapist; since it damaged the victim, too, it must somehow be her fault as well. Because for a lot of Christians, the idea of an "innocent victim" just isn't palatable. The rape victim MUST have been asking for it, somehow. The battered wife MUST HAVE deserved it for doing or not doing something. They have to find some way to place some blame on the victims so they don't have to face blaming it on their God, or accepting that there is no point to the blame game. Crap just happens, no matter how well we try to anticipate and avoid it.

 

[WizardofOz]

So you dont believe we can earn negative consequences, only positive ones for our own choices?

Sure, if the consequence is equitable to the poor choice. If I don't go to work and I get fired, that can be seen as an equitable outcome of my choice/behavior.

If a woman does X and is raped, I do not blame X for the rape. The outcome is not equitable to her poor choice or behavior: an unseen consequence, perhaps.

Can a rape ever be earned or deserved? Not using any definition of the words that I've looked at. :nono:

No, he didn't

Well, he did in his conversation with me at one point.

kmoney is who provided this definition "earned by ones actions" and the discussion went with that definition.

And rape is not earned by one's actions just as being murder is not earned, et al.

Being that no such thing was presented (other than by those who inserted it and lied about others positions).

Other than crucible, no one said the consequences were justified - even - equtitable, or anything, just that the victim can suffer something, because of their own foolish actions, and no one said its the case in every case, there were very specific scenerios given that were ignored, then lying claims were made that some people believe and support things they dont.

Its pathetic and why i left for a while. Im sad to see its still happening.

I guess it all comes down to semantics then. Everyone is talking past each other's understanding of what 'earn' or 'deserve' means. There is more to it than consequence; the return must match the effort or behavior in order for the return to be considered earned or deserved.

 

[truthjourney]

Let's not forget the terminology used in those rape threads that women choose to be raped, that they asked for it and that they deserved it.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Well, yes he did. It's conflation was implied by the very accusation...he never attempted the distinction.

He's simply backpedaling here.

No, it wasnt, and he stated otherwise directly, to clear it all up, and it was ignored.

I like the "implied" thing, you think it excuses outright lies.

The underlined italicized part, is a blatant lie. He and others have explained themselves wayy to many times to count and are being outright lied about and the only exception is crucible, he is the ONLY person who has in any way implied or otherwise stated that a rapist can be justified.

You are trying right now to continue with a lie, after being corrected.

 

[WizardofOz]

so you earned the heart attack

was it equitable?

How does one 'earn' a heart attack? How silly is that statement to make?

Perhaps try to use an example that involves a party who is doing harm to another party...

 

[Angel4Truth]

How does one 'earn' a heart attack? How silly is that statement to make?

Perhaps try to use an example that involves a party who is doing harm to another party...

Better yet, perhaps you (or anyone else who wants to play dumb now) supply a quote of dosers that says a rapist is justified, excused, less guilty, etc..

that would clear the whole thing up quick. A real quote that says that, not a spin of what you want to say is "implied" from imagination.

Fact, he outright numerous times, said otherwise.

 

[ok doser]

Let's not forget the terminology used in those rape threads that women choose to be raped

that's mine and i've defended it

, that they asked for it

dunno whose that is

and that they deserved it.

mine again, with the qualifier that I'm using as a definition of "deserved" the following: "to earn by one's actions"

 

[ok doser]

How does one 'earn' a heart attack? How silly is that statement to make?

Perhaps try to use an example that involves a party who is doing harm to another party...

711, car, donuts

did you "earn by your actions" the loss of your car?

 

[Angel4Truth]

With that, im out of here, same old crap different day.

 

[quip]

No, it wasnt, and he stated otherwise directly, to clear it all up, and it was ignored.

I like the "implied" thing, you think it excuses outright lies.

The underlined italicized part, is a blatant lie. He and others have explained themselves wayy to many times to count and are being outright lied about and the only exception is crucible, he is the ONLY person who has in any way implied or otherwise stated that a rapist can be justified.

You are trying right now to continue with a lie, after being corrected.

Your problems with implication is of no concern to me.

doser simply blames the victims here. I asked him to draw the line on what behaviors would absolve the woman of any responsibility and he totally ingnored the challange.

To you: A woman all alone in her home has an intruder that rapes her. Is she at fault for being home alone; somehow at fault for attracting the rapists; for being vulnerable; for being female?

Where do you - A4T - draw her culpability line?

 

[ok doser]

You problems with implication is of no concern to me.

doser simply blames the victims here.

i blame them only if they acted in reckless disregard of risk

and their blame does nothing to take responsibility away from the rapist for his actions

I asked him to draw the line on what behaviors would absolve the woman of any responsibility and he totally ingnored the challange.

ignorance of risk

awareness of risk and steps taken to ameliorate the risk

 

[WizardofOz]

There's usually a low ceiling with how much assault a woman takes from a man in public. With men, that ceiling is much higher

Which is why the woman should be assisted first.

- men are much more likely to be mortally injured.

Statistically, yes. I am offering a rather specific scenario however.

So, you tell me :idunno:

Sure did. Care to offer your opinion on what action the officer should take first?

 

[WizardofOz]

Better yet, perhaps you (or anyone else who wants to play dumb now) supply a quote of dosers that says a rapist is justified, excused, less guilty, etc..

that would clear the whole thing up quick. A real quote that says that, not a spin of what you want to say is "implied" from imagination.

Fact, he outright numerous times, said otherwise.

How am I playing dumb? I never claimed that he used those particular words or argument :idunno:

 

[ok doser]

Which is why the woman should be assisted first.

unless it's hillary :banana:

 

[Crucible]

Care to offer your opinion on what action the officer should take first?

It's not really an opinion- an officer would likely stop a man vs man fight before clearing up a man vs woman fight.

I couldn't really imagine that going differently, as men fighting is brutal and swiftly executed- you can't leave that sitting for a second.

 

[WizardofOz]

711, car, donuts

did you "earn by your actions" the loss of your car?

No as your action did not cause your car to drive away.