Originally posted by Proper Knobwell then discuss it and when you do, make sure you discuss evolutionary biology and not the person behind the ideas.
I haven't written any literature on evolutionary biology but it is still my opinion, backed up by mountains of evidence, that life on this planet evolved.
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knobchess is an intellectual exercise but two points remain unanswered,
He's trolling us. Time to leave him be.
1. where has Dr. Diggs stated that one cannot make a moral distinction between homosexuality and child rape, proposed by both FMF and Rank Vader
2.where has Dr. Diggs stated that the data with regard to 'fisting', is representative of all homosexuals, proposed by Smell Palfie
thanks.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAll sex that an adult has with a child is "rape", by definition, and the rapist is a paedophile, by definition. Diggs has deliberately conflated homosexuality with paedophilia (and other sexual activities and orientations). Rank Outsider quoted Diggs verbatim on page 28.
1. where has Dr. Diggs stated that one cannot make a moral distinction between homosexuality and child rape, proposed by both FMF and Rank Vader
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOn a small point, would you please stop calling me names after Darth Vader? I don't find it amusing, and I have never labelled you with any similar terms.
1. where has Dr. Diggs stated that one cannot make a moral distinction between homosexuality and child rape, proposed by both FMF and Rank Vader.
I will happily retract that statement if I said that but, barring a typo, I didn't so I won't.
2 edits
Originally posted by Rank outsideryes you will be happy, here are your words,
On a small point, would you please stop calling me names after Darth Vader? I don't find it amusing, and I have never labelled you with any similar terms.
I will happily retract that statement if I said that but, barring a typo, I didn't so I won't.
'You can logically distinguish between the two because one is a consensual act between adults, and the other is a non-consensual act perpetrated against a minor. (implication of rape)
Only you and Dr Diggs can't see the difference' - Rank Outsider
I will ask you once again, where has Doctor Diggs implied that there is no moral distinction between homosexuality and child rape?
and yes i will be happy to refrain from terming you anything other than Rank Outsider.
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFAs I have a few moments to spare, let me extend the chess analogy.
The rather hapless and reeling robbie has just deployed the 'chess rating argument'!😵
Suppose you asked for a view from a player rated 800 ELO on the next best move. You will get a move of 800 ELO.
Suppose you ask 10 800 ELO players what the next best move is? You get a move of 800 ELO (well, maybe a bit higher as it may reduce the number of really bad errors).
If a 2200 ELO player turns up, and you have any sense at all, you will ignore all the 800 players and go with the 2200 player.
So, if you obtain your evidence on gay sexual activity from one hopelessly biased source, you have one piece of hopelessly biased evidence. Which you should probably ignore.
If you then trawl homophobic websites that are clearly making statistics up, and obtain more such data, you just end up with a larger pile of worthless evidence. You are not improving your knowledge base and you cannot apply 'ranges' or 'averages' to this and claim increasing accuracy or relevance.
If, on the other hand, you can find one reliable source, you should just chuck the rest away and see if you can find more to corroborate it.
Dr Diggs doesn't do this, because he doesn't want to.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThank you.
yes you will be happy, here are your words,
'You can logically distinguish between the two because one is a consensual act between adults, and the other is a non-consensual act perpetrated against a minor. (implication of rape)
Only you and Dr Diggs can't see the difference' - Rank Outsider
I will ask you once again, where has Doctor Diggs ...[text shortened]... pe?
and yes i will be happy to refrain from terming you anything other than Rank Outsider.
I am off home now, and I am out this evening. Will respond tomorrow.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie"A non-consensual act perpetrated against a minor" is rape, robbie. Not an "implication of rape". It is rape, by definition. Unless you disagree?
'You can logically distinguish between the two because one is a consensual act between adults, and the other is a non-consensual act perpetrated against a minor. (implication of rape)
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou expressed some confusion before over why threads that purport to feature your "arguments" about various topics often end up only devolving into discussions "about you".
still not about me
Well, here, I'll explain it to you, since you cannot seem to figure out why on your own.
First off, you may want to ask yourself why this always seems to happen to you. After all, it doesn't happen to many posters; or it happens rarely. But with you, it always seems to happen doesn't it? It's because your "arguments" do not actually give any insight into the topics at hand. They almost always only end up giving insight into your own psychology. Take this thread for instance. I'm not really sure you have presented any actual "argument" here, but you sure did give a lot of insight into how you treat source material selection. And wow is it irresponsible and shameful. That's why it devolves into discussion about you.
Best advice I can give you, if you want to avoid threads becoming "about you" is to develop some intellectual integrity and responsible inquiry habits. Then maybe you would come up with actual arguments worth taking seriously.