DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Totalitarianism: our political enemies committed no crime, so we must chsnge the law!

**LSg44PDu** · 11-13-2006, 11:15 PM

Originally posted by Pekka
Well if you think tehere are average differences based on a race (disregarding environment and other factors), well that's your opinion. I'm not particularly interested in that question so I'm not getting emotional over that. Exactly, and why should anyone get emotional over it? It's scientific question, not a moral one.

What matters is how that carries into your actions of course.

If you treat everyone the same, in the objective world and not your own subjective mind, there's no problem at all. But people like to cry a lot, some people are experts on getting offended, it's their hobby.. for some it's even their job to be offended.

And when you get offended,... it is not YOU who have to reasonably argue, it is the offensive one who has to defend himself, and against what? There's nothing to defend against, because the offended one just got offended, period. So the offensive party always loses that battle, because the tolerance criminals are the ones deciding the winner of that issue, and the winner is the offended one by default and the offensive party is the guilty one - by default.

SO they one who gets offended can always win against anyone, so it's desireable to be offended in certain situatons if they want some goals done. This is, of course ridiculous. But thanks to tolerance criminals, that somehow has gotten to be acceptable and a legit way to act.

That is, the society of the weakest link decides the rules. Yep.

11-13-2006, 11:15 PM	#25
LSg44PDu Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 440 Senior Member	Originally posted by Pekka Well if you think tehere are average differences based on a race (disregarding environment and other factors), well that's your opinion. I'm not particularly interested in that question so I'm not getting emotional over that. Exactly, and why should anyone get emotional over it? It's scientific question, not a moral one. What matters is how that carries into your actions of course. If you treat everyone the same, in the objective world and not your own subjective mind, there's no problem at all. But people like to cry a lot, some people are experts on getting offended, it's their hobby.. for some it's even their job to be offended. And when you get offended,... it is not YOU who have to reasonably argue, it is the offensive one who has to defend himself, and against what? There's nothing to defend against, because the offended one just got offended, period. So the offensive party always loses that battle, because the tolerance criminals are the ones deciding the winner of that issue, and the winner is the offended one by default and the offensive party is the guilty one - by default. SO they one who gets offended can always win against anyone, so it's desireable to be offended in certain situatons if they want some goals done. This is, of course ridiculous. But thanks to tolerance criminals, that somehow has gotten to be acceptable and a legit way to act. That is, the society of the weakest link decides the rules. Yep.
	Quote