The A/R Off Topic Thread

kit3

demfad wrote: »

I dont see anything wrong with kissing your children on the lips. (I do it all the time). But that's not the point of the article....he then jumps to:



And apparently the bould author has spend quite a lot of time 'discussing' gay people, women, black people, travellers, non-christians, muslim terrorists....etc etc.
Donald Trump looks like Bernie Sanders beside this guy and his articles......



The logic:
People who complained about Victoria Beckham kissing her child on social media are the worst kind of whingers. This is symptomatic of a wider culture of whingery which includes anyone complaining about racism, homophobia, sexism, bigotry, sectarianism (and other stuff I get accused of) etc. etc. This is quite a serious matter and could lead to the destruction of Western civilisation.

The article goes on to claim the British Labour party front bench and the SNP (and anyone the author despises) are part of another hated group known as 'weasels and curs'. This is because they did not give David Cameron a standing ovation on stepping down as British PM, just after his hugely successful Brexit referendum.



Moronic article.

Let me begin by saying that I would usually disagree with anything this man writes. However, what he is saying here is that it is becoming impossible to disagree / have a reasoned discussion with someone who is gay/a black activist / a Traveller spokesperson because it is taken to be an attack on them because of their status and the facts of the disagreement / discussion are not taken as relevant. In other words, political correctness has gone completely overboard and is, in fact, doing a dis-service to those people who initially needed that support. The issue in relation to the Labour Party was a separate commentary

davedanon

My fifteen year-old son still kisses his mother on the lips. Me too, but less frequently. He does it willingly and unashamedly in front of family and others. It was always led by him. Not something I ever foisted on him, but as long as he was happy I was more than happy to go along. Bit of a thing in our family with kissing on the lips, actually. The da always did it. Nonplussed the MiL the first time she met him, I can tell you.

walshb

I find that I more agree with Ian than disagree with him as regards his pieces. He's not afraid to say what people think.

kit3

davedanon wrote: »

My fifteen year-old son still kisses his mother on the lips. Me too, but less frequently. He does it willingly and unashamedly in front of family and others. It was always led by him. Not something I ever foisted on him, but as long as he was happy I was more than happy to go along. Bit of a thing in our family with kissing on the lips, actually. The da always did it. Nonplussed the MiL the first time she met him, I can tell you.

You still kiss his mother on the lips 'but less frequently' ??? 😜

demfad

kit3 wrote: »

Let me begin by saying that I would usually disagree with anything this man writes. However, what he is saying here is that it is becoming impossible to disagree / have a reasoned discussion with someone who is gay/a black activist / a Traveller spokesperson because it is taken to be an attack on them because of their status and the facts of the disagreement / discussion are not taken as relevant. In other words, political correctness has gone completely overboard and is, in fact, doing a dis-service to those people who initially needed that support. The issue in relation to the Labour Party was a separate commentary

So you usually disagree with everything this man writes about. Except when he complains about people disagreeing with the types of things he writes about. Then you agree with him?

UM1

demfad wrote: »

So you disagree with everything this man writes about. Except when he complains about people disagreeing with the types of things he writes about. Then you agree with him?

Think she may have used the word "usually"...

demfad

UM1 wrote: »

Think she may have used the word "usually"...

She actually said 'she would usually disagree with anything this man writes' but just for you. Edited.....

You felt it was a 'good article'. I take it you agree with his excellent opinions on the circumstances David Cameron's resignation speech? Or didn't you even read it...

UM1

demfad wrote: »

She actually said 'she would usually disagree with anything this man writes' but just for you. Edited.....makes no difference as far as I can see...

You felt it was a 'good article'. I take it you agree with his excellent opinions on the circumstances David Cameron's resignation speech? Or didn't you even read it...

No didnt read it ..just saw a foto of a nice gal and thought id share it..im shallow like that.

demfad

UM1 wrote: »

No didnt read it ..just saw a foto of a nice gal and thought id share it..im shallow like that.

If you say so, but I notice you've dodged the actual question:

Lets try again. Given that you called this a 'good article' do you agree with his opinions on the circumstances surrounding David Cameron's resignation speech as he brilliantly outlined?

UM1

demfad wrote: »

If you say so, but I notice you've dodged the actual question:

Lets try again. Given that you called this a 'good article' do you agree with his opinions on the circumstances surrounding David Cameron's resignation speech as he brilliantly outlined?

Whether i agree or not with the authors sentiments are fock all business of urs.

demfad

UM1 wrote: »

Whether i agree or not with the authors sentiments are fock all business of urs.

If you don't want anyone to know that you agree or disagree with the an author's sentiment in his article then it's best not to publicly link it here with only the words 'good article' to accompany it.

UM1 wrote: »

No didnt read it ..just saw a foto of a nice gal and thought id share it..im shallow like that.

Change of style?

kit3

demfad wrote: »

So you usually disagree with everything this man writes about. Except when he complains about people disagreeing with the types of things he writes about. Then you agree with him?

Maybe you should read my post again - it's self explanatory.

I usually find that I disagree with his opinions. I am by nature a liberal person & I have a strong social conscience. On this occasion however, I find myself agreeing to a degree as I already outlined - I think that political correctness has gone overboard to the extent that, in some cases, you cannot disagree with a member of a minority group without it being taken as an attack on the group rather than a difference of opinion.

pgmcpq

kit3 wrote: »

Let me begin by saying that I would usually disagree with anything this man writes. However, what he is saying here is that it is becoming impossible to disagree / have a reasoned discussion with someone who is gay/a black activist / a Traveller spokesperson because it is taken to be an attack on them because of their status and the facts of the disagreement / discussion are not taken as relevant. In other words, political correctness has gone completely overboard and is, in fact, doing a dis-service to those people who initially needed that support. The issue in relation to the Labour Party was a separate commentary

Step back for a minute : He has taken an unreasonable internet reaction and used it to conjour a "strawman" to alow him launch into a bit of rant. How you get from people with who get worked up about Victoria Beckham to "the destruction of western civilization" is a bit beyond me.

kit3

pgmcpq wrote: »

Step back for a minute : He has taken an unreasonable internet reaction and used it to conjour a "strawman" to alow him launch into a bit of rant. How you get from people with who get worked up about Victoria Beckham to "the destruction of western civilization" is a bit beyond me.

You're right - he has. That is why I prefaced my post with saying that I usually find his articles disagreeable. In this case, however, I agree with the sentiment (albeit not necessarily how it is expressed) that, for me, political correctness has gone into overdrive to the extent that, in some cases, expressing an opinion (on anything) that is contrary to the opinion expressed by a member of a minority group is taken to be a personal attack on that group.

walshb

kit3 wrote: »

You're right - he has. That is why I prefaced my post with saying that I usually find his articles disagreeable. In this case, however, I agree with the sentiment (albeit not necessarily how it is expressed) that, for me, political correctness has gone into overdrive to the extent that, in some cases, expressing an opinion (on anything) that is contrary to the opinion expressed by a member of a minority group is taken to be a personal attack on that group.

You were crystal clear the first time!

pgmcpq

kit3 wrote: »

You're right - he has. That is why I prefaced my post with saying that I usually find his articles disagreeable. In this case, however, I agree with the sentiment (albeit not necessarily how it is expressed) that, for me, political correctness has gone into overdrive to the extent that, in some cases, expressing an opinion (on anything) that is contrary to the opinion expressed by a member of a minority group is taken to be a personal attack on that group.

Hummm... it's all perspective... try being a minority and expressing an unpopular opinion ! In fairness. I may be sensitive, I live in the US and am saddened by the number of people I have encountered who say "Oh Trump is awful ... but he does have a point".
Peace.

walshb

pgmcpq wrote: »

Hummm... it's all perspective... try being a minority and expressing an unpopular opinion ! In fairness. I may be sensitive, I live in the US and am saddened by the number of people I have encountered who say "Oh Trump is awful ... but he does have a point".
Peace.

Trump's issue is not so much what he says, but how he says it and expresses it. How the most powerful nation on earth, and the nation that is supposed to be leading and setting examples can even consider him is what is worrying.

kit3

pgmcpq wrote: »

Hummm... it's all perspective... try being a minority and expressing an unpopular opinion ! In fairness. I may be sensitive, I live in the US and am saddened by the number of people I have encountered who say "Oh Trump is awful ... but he does have a point".
Peace.

Fair enough - I am actually extremely liberal & conscious of minority groups & their rights. I just think the manner in which things have evolved in some areas doesn't help minorities. Peace

kit3

walshb wrote: »

You were crystal clear the first time!

I thought so

davedanon

walshb wrote: »

Trump's issue is not so much what he says

By the by, and this is not me getting the walshie-hammer out again, but I rather think that isn't true. Is there some sort of better, nicer way of declaring that you want to ban all Muslims, expel Mexicans because "they're all rapists" and make them build a wall between the two countries at their own expense? Or a kinder way of mocking a journalist's physical affliction at a rally?

demfad

kit3 wrote: »

Maybe you should read my post again - it's self explanatory

Yes. You admit that you don't agree with Mr O'Doherty's views on social issues e.g homosexuality, race, religion, gender etc. etc. but you do agree with him when he denigrates others as 'PC brigade' who also disagree with him on those issues. Crystal clear (if non-sensical).

To expose what nonsense this is we don't need to go any further back than the equality referendum. Panti Bliss was cautioned by a cowardly RTE for questioning some of the arguments of the ultra right wing Catholic Iona Institute and others. 'PC gone mad' was a favourite of Iona's also used with about as much real substantiation as yourself or Mr O'Doherty can provide. It seems clear that anyone can say anything they want and resort to shouting 'PC gone mad!' when the time comes to actually back-up their positions with reason and logic.

Enough time wasted with this stupid article.

pgmcpq

walshb wrote: »

Trump's issue is not so much what he says, but how he says it and expresses it. How the most powerful nation on earth, and the nation that is supposed to be leading and setting examples can even consider him is what is worrying.

No, really it's what he says. He's nothing if not clear.

walshb

pgmcpq wrote: »

No, really it's what he says. He's nothing if not clear.

I didn't say that he was not clear. It's his dogmatic expression that is the issue more so IMO. I am not saying that all of what he says is right. It is not. But, he does make some valid and correct points as well. In other words, he's not all bad!

kit3

demfad wrote: »

Yes. You admit that you don't agree with Mr O'Doherty's views on social issues e.g homosexuality, race, religion, gender etc. etc. but you do agree with him when he denigrates others as 'PC brigade' who also disagree with him on those issues. Crystal clear (if non-sensical).

To expose what nonsense this is we don't need to go any further back than the equality referendum. Panti Bliss was cautioned by a cowardly RTE for questioning some of the arguments of the ultra right wing Catholic Iona Institute and others. 'PC gone mad' was a favourite of Iona's also used with about as much real substantiation as yourself or Mr O'Doherty can provide.

Enough time wasted with this stupid article.

You seem incapable of understanding my point (which I have made a number of times in different ways to simplify it) so I think we shouldn't waste anymore time on this.

walshb

Anyone else liking this thread? Starting to remind me of the old favourite, the rant thread!

pgmcpq

pgmcpq wrote: »

.... and am saddened by the number of people I have encountered who say "Oh Trump is awful ... but he does have a point".

walshb wrote: »

But, he does make some valid and correct points as well. In other words, he's not all bad!

**Sigh**

kit3

pgmcpq wrote: »

**Sigh**

**sigh & worry** Hope there's not too many who think like this

walshb

pgmcpq wrote: »

**Sigh**

You do realise that he has made points, not one single point. I disagree with a lot of his points.

davedanon

walshb wrote: »

You do realise that he has made points, not one single point. I disagree with a lot of his points.

Are you saying that he has a lot of points, quite an awful of points, and that he has the best points?

davedanon

Tell us a good one that he made. G'wan.