View Single Post
Old March 4th, 2018, 02:06 AM   #9
Awesome Poster
Name: Cedrick
Join Date: December 14, 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada
Gender: Male
Default Re: Harsh Rules Agianst Discrimination

Originally Posted by PlasmaHam View Post
But why? Because it triggers you?

Look, people make offensive and miseducated claims against my own beliefs all the time. Not to name names, but there are certain users here who, purposely or not, commonly make sweeping negative assumptions and accusations towards Christianity, of which I am a Christian. But do you see me going into a rage and demanding bans because someone says God is a heartless monster with rage issues? No, you don't. Instead I just ask them why they believe that, ask them to back up those beliefs, and then I attempt to show them why they are wrong. If they still believe that fallacy, well then that's their problem, not mine, and I continue on with life. I say all that just to express my confusion as to why you think posts you deem offensive or miseducated need to be removed immediately, even though I and almost everyone else here copes fine with them.

I will give you that the rules need stricter punishment. I have advocated for that myself, since like you I've noticed users who repeatedly break the rules keep doing it without much more than a finger-wag from the mods. If there was stricter punishment, up to and including bans, then I believe there would be less troll posters. So on that topic we agree, but that really isn't your main point here.

I fail to see why certain words or statements in a factual debate would somehow make it unacceptable. As long as the intent of the terms isn't to offend, then I see no reason to censor it. Those who are triggered at the mere use of certain words, then that is their own problem they need to deal with. We shouldn't be censoring VT members because of an overly-sensitive minority.
To be very honest, when I originally posted this I did so because I believed that rule changes was the answer to this problem. Now, after reviewing the rules very closely, I agree with you that the problem is more closely linked to the enforcement of those rules.

As for your example of God not being as loving as you believe, to me that may be up for debate. To me, that is very different than someone saying such as "Christians worship an evil deity that wants to create chaos by brutally murdering innocent people". There is a line that cannot be crossed. I don't believe that your example crossed that line.

I realize that it is not necessary to start quoting facts when somebody states their opinion. But when you are debating something and going back and forth numerous times with the same person, unless the only words being used are "yes" and "no" over and over again facts will be used and opinions will be mentioned. And that is good. When something can be backed up, the argument has significance. Discriminatory comments against Islam cannot be defended with facts because they are completely wrong.

Canada / Sport Management (Hockey) Major / Straight / Left-Wing Progressive / 18 yrs old

Cedrick Desjardins
NewLeafsFan is offline   Reply With Quote