{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Deus:
3/31/2013 2:29:42 AM
13
Marriage isn't a right. Rights are arbitrarily determined, and nothing is in and of itself a right. Also we have had enough of these threads. Try being original.
And learn the difference between abnormal and natural. I recommend dictionary.com. Not to mention it's obvious the most sentient species would have a stigma against anything. Not only are you unoriginal, you can't even bring forth any valid points.
English
-
>US operates under the human rights set by the UN over 50 says ago >Them human rights say it's a right to marry who you will as long as they can consent. I'm sorry Deus, you're wrong again.
-
You did nothing to disprove my point. All you did was say the UN made rights and the US has to follow it. You're just as dumb as quantum.
-
Really? From what I read he owned your ass and you muted him because you couldn't handle it. The US has to follow it? No, the US chooses to follow it, as do many countries.
-
Edited by Deus: 3/31/2013 9:47:45 PMI muted him because he regurgitated the same thing over and over again and was too stupid to understand my point. He wasted my time. If you think he owned me, then that only proves you were also too stupid to comprehend my point. It's also funny how you think arguing semantics is a valid rebuttal. Like I said, rights are arbitrarily determined. They don't have to be followed if they're established by an organization such as the UN. And considering I only mute people who waste my time, I'll be muting you. Like quantum, I'll be happy knowing I won't see your posts around.
-
Edited by Quantum: 3/31/2013 2:35:39 AM[quote]Marriage isn't a right. [/quote] Because I said so! [i]Right?[/i] [quote] Rights are arbitrarily determined, and nothing is in and of itself a right. Also we have had enough of these threads. Try being original. [/quote] Actually, quite a few things are rights. I don't remember any counter argument threads posted recently. [quote] And learn the difference between abnormal and natural. [/quote] [b]And learn the difference between an opinion and a fact.[/b] Abnormal in nature is precisely known as "unnatural". Please, do improve your reading comprehension. [quote] Not only are you unoriginal, you can't even bring forth any valid points.[/quote] Oh no! Originality was a point determining the success of a thread! It's not like this thread is rebuttable and not actually pushing forward any major arguments for gay marriage, but poor Deus Ex tells other people to improve their reading comprehension (in other threads) whilst unable to do so himself.
-
Again, like I said, rights are arbitrarily determined. The fact that there are differently determined rights through all of human history, some you agree with and disagree with, means that they aren't naturally determined. They're a product of our own philosophical interpretation of what should and shouldn't be given to people. Abnormal in nature isn't unnatural. Autism is abnormal, but not unnatural. Cancer is abnormal, but not unnatural. Mutations are abnormal, but not unnatural. Abnormality deviates from the norm, but taht in no way makes it unnatural. Anything occurring in a biological context without outside influence is natural. Thank you for proving my point in which you're too stupid to understand basic definition and have a horrible understanding of basic biology. Your last statement is also a testament to how desperate you are to seem intelligent and are trying way too hard to make an insult, which you obviously failed at. Nothing you said is original and has been contradicted on numerous occations. You're the typical kid trying to get a lot of replies because you're irrelevant on this forum. Want to keep replying and proving your stupidity? Or do you want to stop now to prevent further embarrassment?
-
Half of your post is full on insults and ad hominems, Dredd.
-
[quote]Again, like I said, rights are arbitrarily determined. The fact that there are differently determined rights through all of human history, some you agree with and disagree with, means that they aren't naturally determined. [/quote] There are a number of "natural" rights that do exist. Remember that access to clean water and food are definitely two of those. [quote] They're a product of our own philosophical interpretation of what should and shouldn't be given to people. [/quote] And in this case, they should be given to gay couples. [quote] Abnormal in nature isn't unnatural. Autism is abnormal, but not unnatural. Cancer is abnormal, but not unnatural. Mutations are abnormal, but not unnatural. Abnormality deviates from the norm, but taht in no way makes it unnatural. Anything occurring in a biological context without outside influence is natural. Thank you for proving my point in which you're too stupid to understand basic definition and have a horrible understanding of basic biology. [/quote] Unfortunately for you, as I have stated before, you are simply claiming it to be "abnormal" without any reasoning behind it. Opinion. That's the whole point! You don't have any good arguments, do you? Please tell me! How is being gay "abnormal". Is normal "majority" decides?[b] Does that mean supporting Mitt Romney in the 2012 election is "abnormal" because the majority of people didn't do it? Or being albino, frankly a large amount of minorities, by your stupid definition. [/b] Your argument is stupid beyond all levels, and biologically, genetic variation, and in this case homosexuality, is normal in every definition of the word.
-
Natural rights are still arbitrarily determined philosophically. You could argue those are rights, but that doesn't beyond all certainty make them rights. When you learn basic definitions and context, then I'll take you seriously. Apparently you were too stupid to comprehend my post anyway. Again, you still failed to comprehend anything I said. And there is reasoning behind the abnormality. Just because you're not smart to understand it doesn't mean it isn't there. The percentage of gays in our species is incredibly low. It defies the reproductive purpose of a species and is inherently a disadvantage to a species. You claim I have no good arguments, but in reality you're too stupid to understand them and it's blatantly obvious. You couldn't even grasp the basic concept of a right and the basic definition of abnormal, so why should I expect you to understand the complexities of biology? And no, abnormalities doesn't hold merit in regards to an election, further proving you're not smart enough to even apply the terminology. I bet you thought you had a valid analogy didn't you? And being albino is by definition abnormal. It an undesirable trait that deviates from the biological norm of producing melanin. So lets break this down. You fail to understand what rights are and how they're determined. You too stupid to understand the definition of normal and abnormal. You fail at applying both of those terms to real world situations. And you fail at basic reading comprehension. Like I said before, every time you reply, you just end up embarrassing yourself.
-
Edited by Quantum: 3/31/2013 3:14:46 AM[quote] And there is reasoning behind the abnormality. Just because you're not smart to understand it doesn't mean it isn't there. [/quote] This is going to be good. [quote]The percentage of gays in our species is incredibly low. [/quote] The stigma may have something to do with it. Also, it is irrelevant, for reasons stated in previous posts. [quote] It defies the reproductive purpose of a species and is inherently a disadvantage to a species. [/quote] The human population is not in any way significantly affected by gays. Try again. Too bad genetic variation is generally considered a good thing. [quote] You claim I have no good arguments, but in reality you're too stupid to understand them and it's blatantly obvious. [/quote] Someone is disagreeing with my opinion! He must be an idiot! [quote] You couldn't even grasp the basic concept of a right and the basic definition of abnormal, so why should I expect you to understand the complexities of biology?[/quote] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect[/url] When you entire argument is based on semantics and opinion, you are doing it wrong. [quote] And no, abnormalities doesn't hold merit in regards to an election, further proving you're not smart enough to even apply the terminology. I bet you thought you had a valid analogy didn't you? [/quote] Actually, it's perfectly valid, because your definition is so insanely retarded that it relies on strength in numbers, as opposed to actual abnormalities. [quote] And being albino is by definition abnormal. It an undesirable trait that deviates from the biological norm of producing melanin. [/quote] Undesirable according to who? Are you really that retarded? Apparently biological norm= majority. How long is it going to take until you get muted again by everyone, Dredd? "Deus Ex's" posting style is so similar and the arguments are so retarded that it is only a matter of time until it occurs.
-
Edited by Deus: 3/31/2013 3:32:58 AMWhat do you mean it's going to be good? I literally explained it to you earlier. Are you seriously that incompetent? And the percentage is relevant because it attests to the fact that it's abnormal. Something apparently you still can't grasp. And just because it isn't affected doesn't mean it contradicts the reproductive purposes of a species. Your argument claiming it "does't affect it" bears literally no relevance to the fact that it doesn't even remotely benefit it, yet does the opposite. Also genetic variation that is beneficial or neutral is the only variation that should be acceptable. Not something that has harm. When you understand basic biology, come back. Because it's tiresome thrashing your moronic arguments constantly and explaining middle school knowledge to you. And you're an idiot not because you disagree, but because you fail miserably at basic reading comprehension and aren't smart enough to understand basic definitions. You are quite literally a prime example of someone who is horribly uneducated and unintelligent. I wont even attempt to address the out of place and misrepresented link you posted in a desperate attempt to look clever. And yet again you prove you're too stupid to comprehend my post. I have argued on multiple occasions not the numbers, but the effects of the abnormality. Literally after two explanations, you're still too stupid and incompetent to understand it. At this point, you are either a troll, or you're genuinely this stupid and unintelligent. At this point, I feel like I'm wasting my time. Not only are you too incapable of basic comprehension, you didn't even remotely provide counter arguments, and now you're accusing me of being another person because you're not smart enough to provide an argument. Instead of actually providing a counter argument, all you can say is "your arguments are retarded". Proving all you have to cling on to is ad hominem. Muted and reported for trolling. I'll be happy to not experience your moronic posts around these forums anymore.
-
Edited by Quantum: 3/31/2013 3:51:57 AM[quote]What do you mean it's going to be good? I literally explained it to you earlier. [b]Are you seriously that incompetent? [/b] And the percentage is relevant because it attests to the fact that it's abnormal. [b]Something apparently you still can't grasp.[/b] And just because it isn't affected doesn't mean it contradicts the reproductive purposes of a species. Your argument claiming it "does't affect it" bears literally no relevance to the fact that it doesn't even remotely benefit it, yet does the opposite. Also genetic variation that is beneficial or neutral is the only variation that should be acceptable. Not something that has harm. [b]When you understand basic biology, come back. Because it tiresome thrashing your moronic arguments constantly and explaining middle school knowledge to you.[/b] [b]And you're an idiot not because you disagree, but because you fail miserably at basic reading comprehension and aren't smart enough to understand basic definitions. You are quite literally a prime example of someone who is horribly uneducated and unintelligent.[/b] I wont even attempt to address the out of place and misrepresented link [b]you posted in a desperate attempt to look clever. [/b] [b]And yet again you prove you're too stupid to comprehend my post. [/b]I have argued on multiple occasions not the numbers, but the effects of the abnormality. Literally after two explanations, [b]you're still too stupid and incompetent to understand it. [/b] At this point, [b]you are either a troll, or you're genuinely this stupid and unintelligent.[/b] At this point, I feel like I'm wasting my time. [b]Not only are you too incapable of basic comprehension,[/b] you didn't even remotely provide counter arguments, and now you're accusing me of being another person [b]because you're not smart enough to provide an argument.[/b] Instead of actually providing a counter argument, all you can say is "your arguments are retarded". Proving all you have to cling on to is ad hominem. Muted and reported for trolling. I'll be happy to not experience your [b]moronic posts around these forums anymore.[/b][/quote] In bold: all of your insults. Now, here are your insults removed. [quote]What do you mean it's going to be good? I literally explained it to you earlier. And the percentage is relevant because it attests to the fact that it's abnormal. And just because it isn't affected doesn't mean it contradicts the reproductive purposes of a species. Your argument claiming it "does't affect it" bears literally no relevance to the fact that it doesn't even remotely benefit it, yet does the opposite. Also genetic variation that is beneficial or neutral is the only variation that should be acceptable. Not something that has harm. I wont even attempt to address the out of place and misrepresented link I have argued on multiple occasions not the numbers, but the effects of the abnormality. Literally after two explanations, At this point, I feel like I'm wasting my time. you didn't even remotely provide counter arguments, and now you're accusing me of being another person Instead of actually providing a counter argument, all you can say is "your arguments are retarded". Proving all you have to cling on to is ad hominem. Muted and reported for trolling. [/quote] I'll go through them, one by one. 1. I was referring to your post having comedic value, and I must say, you do not disappoint. 2. Again, minority=/= abnormal. That is a stupid argument. Here's a challenge, make a thread claiming that genetic minority=abnormality. Let's see how that goes down. 3. Human population growth is almost entirely independent from homosexuality. Genetic variation having a net effect has no relevance on whether laws should be made, or an entire group of humans being dehumanized as abnormal. 4. The Dunning Kruger effect refers to those who consider themselves as superior, and are unable to acknowledge their mistakes. Since you go around claiming that everyone who disagrees with you lacks knowledge in a certain subject, you are a great example of this effect. 5. You are [i]wasting [/i]your time. 6. Note: I have run out of biological issues to discuss, because your post was mostly made up of insults. Compare the before and after post size. 7. Ad Hominem is not simply insulting someone or their argument. For example, "Deus Ex is retarded" is not ad hominem. "His arguments are retarded" is also not ad hominem. An example of ad hominem would be"Deus Ex is retarded, [b]therefore[/b], his arguments are invalid".
-
[quote]Muted and reported for trolling.[/quote]HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HE DOES IT AGAIN EVERYONE. MUTED AND REPORTED FOR TROLLING. HOLY SHIT, HE GOT YOU GOOD. Seriously, everyone thinks that you need to kill yourself. Stop posting here.
