Also ironic, coming from one of the people who complained first. Anyway, my point is that there's a difference between saying you're X and being transgender.
Content Removed I said some dumb things in the past, this especially. You can see what was said in the quoted reply, and I'm not proud of it. I've since learned how important gender identity is for people, and have not held this bigoted opinion for some time.
I will admit, that was a bit of a straw man. Can we just go about our days now? I'm done. You didn't win, I didn't win either. Society as a whole will decide the winning side of this debate, not just some kids on a car game forum.
Content Removed I said some dumb things in the past, this especially. You can see what was said in the quoted reply, and I'm not proud of it. I've since learned how important gender identity is for people, and have not held this bigoted opinion for some time.
Ah there it is. Problem number one, assuming everyone has a "group" or "side" and not that they all just have many varying and differing opinions. Adult here too fyi.
As am I. We do sure act like children sometimes, though. Okay, so maybe it isn't that simple. Point is, society will eventually reach a consensus on issues like these. I'm done arguing.
Content Removed I said some dumb things in the past, this especially. You can see what was said in the quoted reply, and I'm not proud of it. I've since learned how important gender identity is for people, and have not held this bigoted opinion for some time.
That is your opinion. I respect it, and also believe that it is incorrect - its premise, to me, looks like a straw-man form of what it means to be transgender. That is my opinion. I have no problem with the LGBT community either. I feel like some people don't understand them, and this leads people to make faulty arguments against them. Nutpicking sure doesn't help either. /ARGUMENT, for the love of God.
Anyone hear anything from Catalonia and spain chaos? I live in catalonia and everybody is doing things ones vs others every day, tell me what do you think
Spoiler: Trigger warning, proceed at your own risk That really sounds like train equivalent of homosexualism. Different from majority, yet useless (sorry people, but for the evolution human species you are really useless). But I guess it's gonna be fine if she will be just another character and not a topic for constant discussion. Sadly, I doubt that because with sjw crap being so popular nowadays, there will certainly be at least one episode that revolves solely around Lexi's cab placement.
Well, not necessarily. There's always the chance of getting a job in science, and making breakthroughs / developing new research that benefits us all.
The show has over 60 characters. And who really gives a damn about whether someone is likely to have children or not? It literally doesn't matter to anything. Secondly, LGBT+ people can and do have children, whether it is via test tube or finding a male willing to donate or a female willing to host. In which case they would be contributing to the "evolution human species", based upon your ass backwards definition of what contributing to evolution actually is.
Let's play count the fallacies! Can you say: "Straw Man"? Count: 1 Can you say: "ad hominem"? Count: 2 Strawman #2! With a added ad hominem! Count: 4 ooh, a "tu quoque"!. And another ad hominem too! Count: 6 When you use that many fallacies in an argument, you may want to reconsider your position, because you seem to have lost pretty badly.
Lucky that wasn't a formal debate. Also, for your last one, you quoted the wrong post. / A R G U M E N T I only started that whole thing because I had nothing better to do, and I wanted to watch people whose views generally annoy me scream their asses off.
Time to rename "General Discussion' To: "Discussion on pollitically correct and social justice changes in Thomas the Train."
For the first one I would agree. For the second one the point they were making was not ad hominem, since they were pointing out what they believed to be a contradiction between the use of a rainbow in an avatar and an opinion which they believe to be non supported of LGBT+. So while you can make the case that it may have been based on false assumptions, I think calling it ad hominem is false (since it may have been relevant and wasn't an attack on their character). The rest of them was just them reiterating the 2nd point. In fact, I am going to call you out for using the Fallacy Fallacy. I would also have to say that treating any form of debate as a competition is a very strange concept. Since it can never decide who is actually correct or accurate, it can only ever say who is either a) loudest or b) better at debating.
