MrStonedOne wrote:Super Aggro Crag wrote:Rohen_Tahir wrote:words
what the fuck is this guy talking about
They think being gay is a choice but being too young to drink isn't.
They are likely trying to play some game with wording where they are gonna suggest that they are saying "the act of having sex with another man" is a choice.
In reality all they've done is blunder what they think is a gotcha into a deceleration of a their homophobic and underage nature.
It appears that my post wasn't clear enough to not be interpreted as the exact opposite of what I was trying to state. Fucking hell.
"Men who have sex with men" ≠ homosexual.
Ok so easy to follow explaination of what I was trying to say for the plonkers who weren't just prentending not to get it for the lols:
The following statement by Stickymayhem exists:
At the end of the day I think it should come down to harassing or demeaning people for things about themselves that are inherent to them. That's basically the core rpoblem with bigots and the kinda people we want to expel from the community
It expresses the idea A that whether demeaning or harrasing someone for characteristic B can be considered bigotry depends upon whether B is a inherent trait or not
Idea C:
It is not bigoted to harrass a man who has sex with men for that characteristic, because whether a man is one depends on that man's actions.
Idea D :
It is bigoted to refuse to sell alcohol to a child because a person's date of birth is an inherent characteristic and that's what's used to determine whether a person is a child or not.
If we do not accept idea C, then neither should we accept idea A as A leads to C.
If we do not accept idea D, then neither should we accept
idea A as A leads to D.
C and D are clearly unacceptable for a normal reasonable 1st worlder.
Therefore idea A is not useful and biggotry should be defined in some other way.