Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

fuckincanuck

Rank #19806 on Subscribers
no avatar Level 121 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
Offline
Send mail to fuckincanuck Block fuckincanuck Invite fuckincanuck to be your friend
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:9/15/2012
Last Login:12/26/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 497 total,  560 ,  63
Comment Thumbs: 215 total,  278 ,  63
Content Level Progress: 70% (7/10)
Level 49 Content: Sammich eater → Level 50 Content: Sammich eater
Comment Level Progress: 0% (0/5)
Level 121 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 122 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
Subscribers:3
Content Views:32031
Times Content Favorited:8 times
Total Comments Made:162
FJ Points:713

Show:
Sort by:
Order:

funny pictures

  • Views: 17490
    Thumbs Up 378 Thumbs Down 35 Total: +343
    Comments: 9
    Favorites: 8
    Uploaded: 04/30/13
    See Description See Description
  • Views: 367
    Thumbs Up 3 Thumbs Down 9 Total: -6
    Comments: 1
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 05/03/13
    Ted 2 Ted 2

latest user's comments

#102 - Man I'm gonna bail for two reasons A.) You dont understand…  [+] (1 new reply) 12/05/2014 on How to perv 101 0
#103 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
A.) You don't seem to acknowledge historical trends
B.) A meaningless criticism with nothing to back it up, especially considering we haven't even begun to gloss over any scientific analysis, unless you count social science.
C.) I hope you don't use these kind of arguments on your final.
#100 - Okay so I'm curious, what social ills do homosexuals cause? be…  [+] (3 new replies) 12/05/2014 on How to perv 101 +1
#101 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
I'm not getting into the actual subjects of homosexuality and interracial marriage, we're talking about whether or not this is a case of slippery slope.

You state that you acknowledge that the past information was "incorrect", but that doesn't change that what we know now is true. Do you think that the people who had that "incorrect" information thought they were incorrect? No, they think they're right, just like you do.

They thought that they had a bastion of knowledge, the ultimate truth, they had no idea what would come.

Heres what we do know. In the past 60 years the taboos that we've kept for centuries have been torn down rapidly.

Basically what you're telling me is that you believe that this is where it ends, after gay folks get their "rights" and after trans folks get their "rights" there will be no more attempts at radical social change.

It's pretty convenient for you, isn't it, that everything that makes you uncomfortable or grosses you out will always be taboo, because this is where it ends, right?

Any logical person knows that when you open Pandoras Box you can't just expect it to close at your whim. Things aren't going to stop, and if you live long enough you will likely be known as a bigot, just as you think those who are anti transsexuals are bigots now (if you really think this way, I'm just using it as an example)/
#102 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Man I'm gonna bail for two reasons
A.) You dont understand that history is not linear
B.) You dont seem to undestand how science works
C.) I Have a final at 9:00 A.M.
#103 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
A.) You don't seem to acknowledge historical trends
B.) A meaningless criticism with nothing to back it up, especially considering we haven't even begun to gloss over any scientific analysis, unless you count social science.
C.) I hope you don't use these kind of arguments on your final.
#98 - Well from my understanding these opinions changed not because …  [+] (5 new replies) 12/05/2014 on How to perv 101 0
#99 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
It was thought 60 years ago that gays were mentally disturbed nutcases who couldn't consent, based upon the information they had. Really the information didn't change, the public just changed. When gays became accepted there were cries from parents that the gay culture would harm their kids, but they gave way after awhile. When gays were accepted the majority of the public didn't become gay, they simply became indifferent, and that is the problem.

Based on all of these past social changes we can accurately predict what the public acceptance of bestiality or pedophilia would look like. The public will be disgusted at first, but as a few quacks attempt legitimize these practices, and a few high profile people promote these movements the disgust will turn to indifference, which will lead to decriminalization, which will lead to tolerance.

I'm sure most parents didn't want their kids consorting with blacks either, but lo and behold 2 generation later and it is accepted, even encouraged.

By creating these steps, these doorways, by knocking down these social barriers you're opening up society to a plethora of things that you find strange, and you will be the bigot of tomorrow because of it.

Indifference to the world around us is irresponsible.
#100 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Okay so I'm curious, what social ills do homosexuals cause? because two gay men being married doesn't traumatize one of them. You understand this right? whereas there is some pretty concrete proof of the ills of pedophillia. this is what I am saying homosexuality doesn't affect people in a negative way. nor does interracial marriage. it isnt necessarily your cup of tea but it doesnt really affect you or the people involved in it in a negative way that is specific to either of these types of relationships. pedophillia does damage children and there are studies that find this. I acknowledge that in the past the information was not correct, that does not change what is true. When people began to actually examine their beliefs they found that gay marriage was not so terrible. Interracial and Gay marriage didn't change from something that would harm people to something that would not. It was continuously not harmful to its participants.
#101 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
I'm not getting into the actual subjects of homosexuality and interracial marriage, we're talking about whether or not this is a case of slippery slope.

You state that you acknowledge that the past information was "incorrect", but that doesn't change that what we know now is true. Do you think that the people who had that "incorrect" information thought they were incorrect? No, they think they're right, just like you do.

They thought that they had a bastion of knowledge, the ultimate truth, they had no idea what would come.

Heres what we do know. In the past 60 years the taboos that we've kept for centuries have been torn down rapidly.

Basically what you're telling me is that you believe that this is where it ends, after gay folks get their "rights" and after trans folks get their "rights" there will be no more attempts at radical social change.

It's pretty convenient for you, isn't it, that everything that makes you uncomfortable or grosses you out will always be taboo, because this is where it ends, right?

Any logical person knows that when you open Pandoras Box you can't just expect it to close at your whim. Things aren't going to stop, and if you live long enough you will likely be known as a bigot, just as you think those who are anti transsexuals are bigots now (if you really think this way, I'm just using it as an example)/
#102 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Man I'm gonna bail for two reasons
A.) You dont understand that history is not linear
B.) You dont seem to undestand how science works
C.) I Have a final at 9:00 A.M.
#103 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
A.) You don't seem to acknowledge historical trends
B.) A meaningless criticism with nothing to back it up, especially considering we haven't even begun to gloss over any scientific analysis, unless you count social science.
C.) I hope you don't use these kind of arguments on your final.
#96 - I really want to make a joke about not having a horse in the r… 12/05/2014 on How to perv 101 0
#95 - I still feel like the point where your linkage breaks down is …  [+] (8 new replies) 12/05/2014 on How to perv 101 0
#97 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
You're speaking from the mindset of someone from our generation. Do you think that peoples from the 1700's would've considered blacks humans, and worthy of consent? Surely there was a greater reworking of law to legitimize minorities in western societies and we did that.

For the longest time we considered homosexuals mentally disturbed and therefor unable to consent, can you say it's impossible that a doctor in the tolerant future could state that a horse or a child could give consent?

In fact, given what we know, and especially considering the past, it's seems like it's almost certain it's going to happen.
#98 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Well from my understanding these opinions changed not because of changes in attitudes of the general public but because of changes in the information the general public possessed. Because we can fairly certainly say that sexual relationships with adults damages the affected children psychologically most parents would vehemently oppose such legislation unless you are proposing that the majority of the population will become pedophiles. with the Horses I agree that the notion of property surrounding animals clouds the issue to some degree and that it could fluctuate. But honestly I would not care if someone married a horse. It would not affect my life.
#99 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
It was thought 60 years ago that gays were mentally disturbed nutcases who couldn't consent, based upon the information they had. Really the information didn't change, the public just changed. When gays became accepted there were cries from parents that the gay culture would harm their kids, but they gave way after awhile. When gays were accepted the majority of the public didn't become gay, they simply became indifferent, and that is the problem.

Based on all of these past social changes we can accurately predict what the public acceptance of bestiality or pedophilia would look like. The public will be disgusted at first, but as a few quacks attempt legitimize these practices, and a few high profile people promote these movements the disgust will turn to indifference, which will lead to decriminalization, which will lead to tolerance.

I'm sure most parents didn't want their kids consorting with blacks either, but lo and behold 2 generation later and it is accepted, even encouraged.

By creating these steps, these doorways, by knocking down these social barriers you're opening up society to a plethora of things that you find strange, and you will be the bigot of tomorrow because of it.

Indifference to the world around us is irresponsible.
#100 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Okay so I'm curious, what social ills do homosexuals cause? because two gay men being married doesn't traumatize one of them. You understand this right? whereas there is some pretty concrete proof of the ills of pedophillia. this is what I am saying homosexuality doesn't affect people in a negative way. nor does interracial marriage. it isnt necessarily your cup of tea but it doesnt really affect you or the people involved in it in a negative way that is specific to either of these types of relationships. pedophillia does damage children and there are studies that find this. I acknowledge that in the past the information was not correct, that does not change what is true. When people began to actually examine their beliefs they found that gay marriage was not so terrible. Interracial and Gay marriage didn't change from something that would harm people to something that would not. It was continuously not harmful to its participants.
#101 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
I'm not getting into the actual subjects of homosexuality and interracial marriage, we're talking about whether or not this is a case of slippery slope.

You state that you acknowledge that the past information was "incorrect", but that doesn't change that what we know now is true. Do you think that the people who had that "incorrect" information thought they were incorrect? No, they think they're right, just like you do.

They thought that they had a bastion of knowledge, the ultimate truth, they had no idea what would come.

Heres what we do know. In the past 60 years the taboos that we've kept for centuries have been torn down rapidly.

Basically what you're telling me is that you believe that this is where it ends, after gay folks get their "rights" and after trans folks get their "rights" there will be no more attempts at radical social change.

It's pretty convenient for you, isn't it, that everything that makes you uncomfortable or grosses you out will always be taboo, because this is where it ends, right?

Any logical person knows that when you open Pandoras Box you can't just expect it to close at your whim. Things aren't going to stop, and if you live long enough you will likely be known as a bigot, just as you think those who are anti transsexuals are bigots now (if you really think this way, I'm just using it as an example)/
#102 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Man I'm gonna bail for two reasons
A.) You dont understand that history is not linear
B.) You dont seem to undestand how science works
C.) I Have a final at 9:00 A.M.
#103 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
A.) You don't seem to acknowledge historical trends
B.) A meaningless criticism with nothing to back it up, especially considering we haven't even begun to gloss over any scientific analysis, unless you count social science.
C.) I hope you don't use these kind of arguments on your final.
#96 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I really want to make a joke about not having a horse in the race now that horse marriage has been brought up......

But how to word it?
#92 - I also think its hilarious that there is a He-Man character na… 12/05/2014 on How to perv 101 0
#90 - I'm really honestly not trying to troll man, I'm just saying i…  [+] (10 new replies) 12/05/2014 on How to perv 101 0
#93 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
This issue isn't a slippery slope. A slippery slope would be jumping to a conclusion without any links or observable trends. There is a trend linking all of these civil rights movements, and that is the pursuit of tolerance and equality. In addition each movement has a history of standing on the shoulders of previous civil rights movements.

The gay pride movement stood on the shoulders of the black civil rights movement for example, even though the two are not explicitly related in anything other than the pursuit of "rights". It can then be assumed that, given that we know that our generation isn't the last generation and we still find many things taboo, that we haven't yet appeased all these civil rights movements.

Therefor, what is stopping a bestiality movement from standing on the shoulders of a past civil rights movement?

The slippery slope does not apply when there is a reasonable and observable trend to the mechanism of the perceived outcome.
#95 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I still feel like the point where your linkage breaks down is in the lack of consenting adults in pedophilia and bestiality. As long as consent is required it doesn't seem like you could arrive at horse marriage. so this is where I see your argument breakdown. without a complete reworking of a great deal of law in what most western societies would consider a negative direction.
#97 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
You're speaking from the mindset of someone from our generation. Do you think that peoples from the 1700's would've considered blacks humans, and worthy of consent? Surely there was a greater reworking of law to legitimize minorities in western societies and we did that.

For the longest time we considered homosexuals mentally disturbed and therefor unable to consent, can you say it's impossible that a doctor in the tolerant future could state that a horse or a child could give consent?

In fact, given what we know, and especially considering the past, it's seems like it's almost certain it's going to happen.
#98 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Well from my understanding these opinions changed not because of changes in attitudes of the general public but because of changes in the information the general public possessed. Because we can fairly certainly say that sexual relationships with adults damages the affected children psychologically most parents would vehemently oppose such legislation unless you are proposing that the majority of the population will become pedophiles. with the Horses I agree that the notion of property surrounding animals clouds the issue to some degree and that it could fluctuate. But honestly I would not care if someone married a horse. It would not affect my life.
#99 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
It was thought 60 years ago that gays were mentally disturbed nutcases who couldn't consent, based upon the information they had. Really the information didn't change, the public just changed. When gays became accepted there were cries from parents that the gay culture would harm their kids, but they gave way after awhile. When gays were accepted the majority of the public didn't become gay, they simply became indifferent, and that is the problem.

Based on all of these past social changes we can accurately predict what the public acceptance of bestiality or pedophilia would look like. The public will be disgusted at first, but as a few quacks attempt legitimize these practices, and a few high profile people promote these movements the disgust will turn to indifference, which will lead to decriminalization, which will lead to tolerance.

I'm sure most parents didn't want their kids consorting with blacks either, but lo and behold 2 generation later and it is accepted, even encouraged.

By creating these steps, these doorways, by knocking down these social barriers you're opening up society to a plethora of things that you find strange, and you will be the bigot of tomorrow because of it.

Indifference to the world around us is irresponsible.
#100 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Okay so I'm curious, what social ills do homosexuals cause? because two gay men being married doesn't traumatize one of them. You understand this right? whereas there is some pretty concrete proof of the ills of pedophillia. this is what I am saying homosexuality doesn't affect people in a negative way. nor does interracial marriage. it isnt necessarily your cup of tea but it doesnt really affect you or the people involved in it in a negative way that is specific to either of these types of relationships. pedophillia does damage children and there are studies that find this. I acknowledge that in the past the information was not correct, that does not change what is true. When people began to actually examine their beliefs they found that gay marriage was not so terrible. Interracial and Gay marriage didn't change from something that would harm people to something that would not. It was continuously not harmful to its participants.
#101 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
I'm not getting into the actual subjects of homosexuality and interracial marriage, we're talking about whether or not this is a case of slippery slope.

You state that you acknowledge that the past information was "incorrect", but that doesn't change that what we know now is true. Do you think that the people who had that "incorrect" information thought they were incorrect? No, they think they're right, just like you do.

They thought that they had a bastion of knowledge, the ultimate truth, they had no idea what would come.

Heres what we do know. In the past 60 years the taboos that we've kept for centuries have been torn down rapidly.

Basically what you're telling me is that you believe that this is where it ends, after gay folks get their "rights" and after trans folks get their "rights" there will be no more attempts at radical social change.

It's pretty convenient for you, isn't it, that everything that makes you uncomfortable or grosses you out will always be taboo, because this is where it ends, right?

Any logical person knows that when you open Pandoras Box you can't just expect it to close at your whim. Things aren't going to stop, and if you live long enough you will likely be known as a bigot, just as you think those who are anti transsexuals are bigots now (if you really think this way, I'm just using it as an example)/
#102 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Man I'm gonna bail for two reasons
A.) You dont understand that history is not linear
B.) You dont seem to undestand how science works
C.) I Have a final at 9:00 A.M.
#103 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
A.) You don't seem to acknowledge historical trends
B.) A meaningless criticism with nothing to back it up, especially considering we haven't even begun to gloss over any scientific analysis, unless you count social science.
C.) I hope you don't use these kind of arguments on your final.
#96 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I really want to make a joke about not having a horse in the race now that horse marriage has been brought up......

But how to word it?
#84 - I asked you to wait until your **** had tightened…  [+] (13 new replies) 12/05/2014 on How to perv 101 0
#86 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
My points are being argued just fine, nobody has shown me otherwise. In fact I just made a detailed counter argument to your claims of "slippery slope".

If anything your argument is pretty weak if all you can do is shout out fallacies without being able to properly explain your ideas.

Can I also advise you to stop trying to troll, you're not good at it.
#92 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I also think its hilarious that there is a He-Man character named Fisto, and I wanted to share that with this comments section.
#90 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I'm really honestly not trying to troll man, I'm just saying its a weak rhetorical tool. I honestly don't care what you think about this topic. And I haven't voiced my opinions on it either. you argued that what was happening was wrong because you didn't like it and it would lead to pedophillia and bestiality. I would once again like to stress I am not commenting on whether you are RIGHT OR WRONG. I am just saying a more effective way to argue what you are arguing would be to perhaps point out the negatives directly caused by the issue at hand. I'm just being a dick about your rhetorical style not your ideology.
#93 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
This issue isn't a slippery slope. A slippery slope would be jumping to a conclusion without any links or observable trends. There is a trend linking all of these civil rights movements, and that is the pursuit of tolerance and equality. In addition each movement has a history of standing on the shoulders of previous civil rights movements.

The gay pride movement stood on the shoulders of the black civil rights movement for example, even though the two are not explicitly related in anything other than the pursuit of "rights". It can then be assumed that, given that we know that our generation isn't the last generation and we still find many things taboo, that we haven't yet appeased all these civil rights movements.

Therefor, what is stopping a bestiality movement from standing on the shoulders of a past civil rights movement?

The slippery slope does not apply when there is a reasonable and observable trend to the mechanism of the perceived outcome.
#95 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I still feel like the point where your linkage breaks down is in the lack of consenting adults in pedophilia and bestiality. As long as consent is required it doesn't seem like you could arrive at horse marriage. so this is where I see your argument breakdown. without a complete reworking of a great deal of law in what most western societies would consider a negative direction.
#97 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
You're speaking from the mindset of someone from our generation. Do you think that peoples from the 1700's would've considered blacks humans, and worthy of consent? Surely there was a greater reworking of law to legitimize minorities in western societies and we did that.

For the longest time we considered homosexuals mentally disturbed and therefor unable to consent, can you say it's impossible that a doctor in the tolerant future could state that a horse or a child could give consent?

In fact, given what we know, and especially considering the past, it's seems like it's almost certain it's going to happen.
#98 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Well from my understanding these opinions changed not because of changes in attitudes of the general public but because of changes in the information the general public possessed. Because we can fairly certainly say that sexual relationships with adults damages the affected children psychologically most parents would vehemently oppose such legislation unless you are proposing that the majority of the population will become pedophiles. with the Horses I agree that the notion of property surrounding animals clouds the issue to some degree and that it could fluctuate. But honestly I would not care if someone married a horse. It would not affect my life.
#99 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
It was thought 60 years ago that gays were mentally disturbed nutcases who couldn't consent, based upon the information they had. Really the information didn't change, the public just changed. When gays became accepted there were cries from parents that the gay culture would harm their kids, but they gave way after awhile. When gays were accepted the majority of the public didn't become gay, they simply became indifferent, and that is the problem.

Based on all of these past social changes we can accurately predict what the public acceptance of bestiality or pedophilia would look like. The public will be disgusted at first, but as a few quacks attempt legitimize these practices, and a few high profile people promote these movements the disgust will turn to indifference, which will lead to decriminalization, which will lead to tolerance.

I'm sure most parents didn't want their kids consorting with blacks either, but lo and behold 2 generation later and it is accepted, even encouraged.

By creating these steps, these doorways, by knocking down these social barriers you're opening up society to a plethora of things that you find strange, and you will be the bigot of tomorrow because of it.

Indifference to the world around us is irresponsible.
#100 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Okay so I'm curious, what social ills do homosexuals cause? because two gay men being married doesn't traumatize one of them. You understand this right? whereas there is some pretty concrete proof of the ills of pedophillia. this is what I am saying homosexuality doesn't affect people in a negative way. nor does interracial marriage. it isnt necessarily your cup of tea but it doesnt really affect you or the people involved in it in a negative way that is specific to either of these types of relationships. pedophillia does damage children and there are studies that find this. I acknowledge that in the past the information was not correct, that does not change what is true. When people began to actually examine their beliefs they found that gay marriage was not so terrible. Interracial and Gay marriage didn't change from something that would harm people to something that would not. It was continuously not harmful to its participants.
#101 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
I'm not getting into the actual subjects of homosexuality and interracial marriage, we're talking about whether or not this is a case of slippery slope.

You state that you acknowledge that the past information was "incorrect", but that doesn't change that what we know now is true. Do you think that the people who had that "incorrect" information thought they were incorrect? No, they think they're right, just like you do.

They thought that they had a bastion of knowledge, the ultimate truth, they had no idea what would come.

Heres what we do know. In the past 60 years the taboos that we've kept for centuries have been torn down rapidly.

Basically what you're telling me is that you believe that this is where it ends, after gay folks get their "rights" and after trans folks get their "rights" there will be no more attempts at radical social change.

It's pretty convenient for you, isn't it, that everything that makes you uncomfortable or grosses you out will always be taboo, because this is where it ends, right?

Any logical person knows that when you open Pandoras Box you can't just expect it to close at your whim. Things aren't going to stop, and if you live long enough you will likely be known as a bigot, just as you think those who are anti transsexuals are bigots now (if you really think this way, I'm just using it as an example)/
#102 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Man I'm gonna bail for two reasons
A.) You dont understand that history is not linear
B.) You dont seem to undestand how science works
C.) I Have a final at 9:00 A.M.
#103 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
A.) You don't seem to acknowledge historical trends
B.) A meaningless criticism with nothing to back it up, especially considering we haven't even begun to gloss over any scientific analysis, unless you count social science.
C.) I hope you don't use these kind of arguments on your final.
#96 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I really want to make a joke about not having a horse in the race now that horse marriage has been brought up......

But how to word it?
#75 - Son, what you just did there is called a slippery slope logica…  [+] (15 new replies) 12/05/2014 on How to perv 101 -1
#81 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
Uh huh. You might not believe this, but I had a felling if I didn't out right mock "muh slipper slope" in my comment someone would hurr durr "muh slippery slope kekekeek".

Let me ask you something. When will we achieve tolerance? During Lincolns time it was just by freeing the slaves, fair enough. Then later on it was just giving them the same rights as whites, ok, that's also fair. Then it was legalizing interracial marriage. I wouldn't do it myself, but I can understand. Then it was not calling homosexuals mentally disturbed. Theres an argument there, alright. Then it was "marriage equality", okay now you're starting to lose me a bit, but okay. Then it was allow gays to adopt, I'll have to disagree, but fine. Then it was people who think they're another gender aren't crazy, not my cup of tea. Then it was we have to accommodate our daily lives for these people, I'll say no. Then it was you have to tolerate those who think they're a different species, fuck that.

So let me ask you, what is the next step? Or can you say for certain that it ends here, with our generation? Or is observing obvious trends a fallacy now, because I thought it was common sense.

Have we reached tolerance and equality yet, because I'm afraid when you're older you might be considered a bigot yourself.
#84 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I asked you to wait until your shit had tightened. You did not wait. I'm not telling you that you are wrong OR right. I'm saying you should try to argue your points better.
#86 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
My points are being argued just fine, nobody has shown me otherwise. In fact I just made a detailed counter argument to your claims of "slippery slope".

If anything your argument is pretty weak if all you can do is shout out fallacies without being able to properly explain your ideas.

Can I also advise you to stop trying to troll, you're not good at it.
#92 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I also think its hilarious that there is a He-Man character named Fisto, and I wanted to share that with this comments section.
#90 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I'm really honestly not trying to troll man, I'm just saying its a weak rhetorical tool. I honestly don't care what you think about this topic. And I haven't voiced my opinions on it either. you argued that what was happening was wrong because you didn't like it and it would lead to pedophillia and bestiality. I would once again like to stress I am not commenting on whether you are RIGHT OR WRONG. I am just saying a more effective way to argue what you are arguing would be to perhaps point out the negatives directly caused by the issue at hand. I'm just being a dick about your rhetorical style not your ideology.
#93 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
This issue isn't a slippery slope. A slippery slope would be jumping to a conclusion without any links or observable trends. There is a trend linking all of these civil rights movements, and that is the pursuit of tolerance and equality. In addition each movement has a history of standing on the shoulders of previous civil rights movements.

The gay pride movement stood on the shoulders of the black civil rights movement for example, even though the two are not explicitly related in anything other than the pursuit of "rights". It can then be assumed that, given that we know that our generation isn't the last generation and we still find many things taboo, that we haven't yet appeased all these civil rights movements.

Therefor, what is stopping a bestiality movement from standing on the shoulders of a past civil rights movement?

The slippery slope does not apply when there is a reasonable and observable trend to the mechanism of the perceived outcome.
#95 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I still feel like the point where your linkage breaks down is in the lack of consenting adults in pedophilia and bestiality. As long as consent is required it doesn't seem like you could arrive at horse marriage. so this is where I see your argument breakdown. without a complete reworking of a great deal of law in what most western societies would consider a negative direction.
#97 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
You're speaking from the mindset of someone from our generation. Do you think that peoples from the 1700's would've considered blacks humans, and worthy of consent? Surely there was a greater reworking of law to legitimize minorities in western societies and we did that.

For the longest time we considered homosexuals mentally disturbed and therefor unable to consent, can you say it's impossible that a doctor in the tolerant future could state that a horse or a child could give consent?

In fact, given what we know, and especially considering the past, it's seems like it's almost certain it's going to happen.
#98 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Well from my understanding these opinions changed not because of changes in attitudes of the general public but because of changes in the information the general public possessed. Because we can fairly certainly say that sexual relationships with adults damages the affected children psychologically most parents would vehemently oppose such legislation unless you are proposing that the majority of the population will become pedophiles. with the Horses I agree that the notion of property surrounding animals clouds the issue to some degree and that it could fluctuate. But honestly I would not care if someone married a horse. It would not affect my life.
#99 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
It was thought 60 years ago that gays were mentally disturbed nutcases who couldn't consent, based upon the information they had. Really the information didn't change, the public just changed. When gays became accepted there were cries from parents that the gay culture would harm their kids, but they gave way after awhile. When gays were accepted the majority of the public didn't become gay, they simply became indifferent, and that is the problem.

Based on all of these past social changes we can accurately predict what the public acceptance of bestiality or pedophilia would look like. The public will be disgusted at first, but as a few quacks attempt legitimize these practices, and a few high profile people promote these movements the disgust will turn to indifference, which will lead to decriminalization, which will lead to tolerance.

I'm sure most parents didn't want their kids consorting with blacks either, but lo and behold 2 generation later and it is accepted, even encouraged.

By creating these steps, these doorways, by knocking down these social barriers you're opening up society to a plethora of things that you find strange, and you will be the bigot of tomorrow because of it.

Indifference to the world around us is irresponsible.
#100 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Okay so I'm curious, what social ills do homosexuals cause? because two gay men being married doesn't traumatize one of them. You understand this right? whereas there is some pretty concrete proof of the ills of pedophillia. this is what I am saying homosexuality doesn't affect people in a negative way. nor does interracial marriage. it isnt necessarily your cup of tea but it doesnt really affect you or the people involved in it in a negative way that is specific to either of these types of relationships. pedophillia does damage children and there are studies that find this. I acknowledge that in the past the information was not correct, that does not change what is true. When people began to actually examine their beliefs they found that gay marriage was not so terrible. Interracial and Gay marriage didn't change from something that would harm people to something that would not. It was continuously not harmful to its participants.
#101 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
I'm not getting into the actual subjects of homosexuality and interracial marriage, we're talking about whether or not this is a case of slippery slope.

You state that you acknowledge that the past information was "incorrect", but that doesn't change that what we know now is true. Do you think that the people who had that "incorrect" information thought they were incorrect? No, they think they're right, just like you do.

They thought that they had a bastion of knowledge, the ultimate truth, they had no idea what would come.

Heres what we do know. In the past 60 years the taboos that we've kept for centuries have been torn down rapidly.

Basically what you're telling me is that you believe that this is where it ends, after gay folks get their "rights" and after trans folks get their "rights" there will be no more attempts at radical social change.

It's pretty convenient for you, isn't it, that everything that makes you uncomfortable or grosses you out will always be taboo, because this is where it ends, right?

Any logical person knows that when you open Pandoras Box you can't just expect it to close at your whim. Things aren't going to stop, and if you live long enough you will likely be known as a bigot, just as you think those who are anti transsexuals are bigots now (if you really think this way, I'm just using it as an example)/
#102 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
Man I'm gonna bail for two reasons
A.) You dont understand that history is not linear
B.) You dont seem to undestand how science works
C.) I Have a final at 9:00 A.M.
#103 - youregaylol (12/05/2014) [-]
A.) You don't seem to acknowledge historical trends
B.) A meaningless criticism with nothing to back it up, especially considering we haven't even begun to gloss over any scientific analysis, unless you count social science.
C.) I hope you don't use these kind of arguments on your final.
#96 - fuckincanuck (12/05/2014) [-]
I really want to make a joke about not having a horse in the race now that horse marriage has been brought up......

But how to word it?
#155 - awwwwwwe yeeeeeeeeeeah ************** 09/28/2013 on Spreading that knowledge +2
[ 148 Total ]

user's channels

Join Subscribe fj-fitness
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 550 / Total items point value: 1000

Comments(0):

 

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
No comments!
 Friends (0)