RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong!

RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

adaddysgirl -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 9:43:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin Ha! MadRabbit, now that you have been judged, labelled and insulted (of course, by someone who claims to not do such things), might I suggest prime rib at our coronation dinner? I was going to suggest Hasenfeffer, but then I realized what a huge faux pas that would be. (good post, btw) Well it's about time you took your rightful place. Could you get some pix? i just love watching coronations! DG

domiguy -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:02:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laurell3 The discussion in this post seems to illustrate the problem pretty well as it's turned into somewhat of a defending and attacking hijack, however, it's difficult to tell who is "right" and who is "wrong". Each poster seems to have a good, well thought out idea of what they want to say and supports their statements farily well. How does one choose who is "right" or "wrong"? That would be me. I'm the one who gets to choose.....Mod11 and I have had some pretty stirring conversations ....And she feels that I should be utilized as the "moral barometer" of CM.....It works like this...I am right and you are wrong...Pretty fucking easy. Also it would be a thoughtful and gracious act on the behalf of adaddysgirl if she would refrain from ending her posts with "DG" ....How about using "adg" in the future? Though highly improbable, I would despair over the fact if some of the healed "methadone" users on this site would every attribute your thoughts as to being mine. Disclaimer....There was never any discussions with mod11 on any subjects other than her suggesting I should try and refrain from being such an a-hole.

adaddysgirl -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:04:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Well... Thank you for showing me how we should keep our opinions to ourselves and not bash other people's actions....by sharing your opinion and bashing my choice and actions to make this post. You see MR...i never said you should keep your opinions to yourself. i did say: voice your opinion (if you feel so inclined); extend a helping hand (if you feel so inclined); but just try to realize that some people do not want your help....and that at some point, enough is enough. And maybe someday you'll even be able to do it without calling others stupid and idiotic because they don't share your same standards. But I think its pretty cool that you have found such negativity in the things I am writing about and spoken up about it. Well, i'm glad you see the "coolness". I've read it, carefully considered your opinion, and found it to be completely lacking. Therefore, its not going to change or influence my opinion. And that is your right. By the same token, that is how others feel about your opinions. So should i call you stupid because you don't see things the way i do? You may go right along and continue to bash and share your opinion about how I should change my viewpoints and philosophy to your viewpoint that we shouldnt bash or share our opinions. That's not exactly what i said but...okay. I support that fully. As I stated in my thread, I think its great and I think its great that you are doing it. (Even if I am a little perplexed as to why you are doing the thing that I talked about and you so strongly disagree with me on...) I have no need to be universally liked and I have no need to have my actions approved by everyone so I can handle them being challenged. Me too. Edited to Add : 90% of the time when I do post something there is a point to it, whether subtle or obivous. I'm sorry you think I was off my rocker with my first post, but I ensure you, you were taking me a bit too serious. There was a valid point behind it if you read between the lines. i did reread it. On the surface, it could appear that some spasmoid wrote it (hence my reference to off your rocker). But perhaps it was an attempt at humor....or sarcasm? DG

MadRabbit -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:06:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl quote: ORIGINAL: heartfeltsub Once more, i believe this was the thread that MR was talking about. http://www.collarchat.com/m_1152489/mpage_10/key_/tm.htm#1157390 Sorry i had missed your edit on your first response. Now is this the post that was referenced?: ...His former slave was an emotional and physical masochist, in the sexual sense. the more he hurt her...whether it was beating her or abusing her emotionally...the more pleasure she experienced. in order for him to cause her to truly suffer, he had to do things he did not truly want to do (break her bones, restrict her contact with her kids). because this was unacceptable to him (going against his own will), he came to the realization that she was simply not the right slave for him. because he needs a slave to suffer, but he is not going to go against his own will in order to make that happen. " And this is what MR said: For example, I can think of one little segment on these boards.a few months ago that has really stuck with me. A certain slave recited a tale about how her Master owned a previous slave and preceded to "break her bones" to show her how extreme he was and how extreme the "no limits" relationship was. The defense of the Master was that he didnt want to do it, but had to do it because it was neccessary. Then the narrator proceeded to shift blame onto the slave because "she should have made sure she fully understood the details of the relationship before entering". Now, when I read something like that and then proceed to watch people compliment the narrator and say things along the lines of "Aww, I understand the dynamic now and how it was necessary.", I think to myself... Am I the last sane person on Earth? The scenario is an utter offense to my rational mind and the reasoning of it all an utter insult to my intiellgence. The main regret I have right now was not actually sharing my own opinion of that completely ludicrous situation and I am somewhat glad I can correct it. And nobody (but me) sees this as just a little bit of an overdramatization? i read the next page to see where prop said he actually did break her bones, that he had to actually do it because it was necessary, and that was because the slave didn't know all the details beforehand, others saw how that was necessary too...and, and, and....all that insulted his intelligence? i didn't see anybody word it quite the way MR did. Could be people read into things what they want? i really hate to say it but.....drama, drama, drama! And insulting his intelligence? Gawd! DG Whether thats the thread or not, I am not gonna comment. Why not? Because I am not looking to start drama. I am looking to convey a point and express an analogy to help express that point. Maybe I made that example up. Maybe its another thread. Maybe its been a few months and my mind has distorted what the thread actually said. Its all germane to this discussion, because it has nothing to do with what I am trying to say in my post. Some people insist on dragging up old threads and saying "Hey this is the thread he is talking about" Certain individuals insist on quoting from that thread, saying "this is what he means even though he never said this is what it means", focusing on the sole segment of the post that could incite drama if people continue to focus on it and made it the issue at hand, and ignoring the actual point and substance of the post entirely. The only one fueling drama in these threads is certain individuals who insist on making this about the hypothetical post that was never introduced as the factual reference and not about the viewpoint itself. If at some point you would actually like to engage in debate over my viewpoint, please feel free to. If you want to try and make this about drama based on your conjecture of what thread I was talking about, go right ahead. Its just making you out to be more of a hyprocite.

MadRabbit -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:11:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl i did reread it. On the surface, it could appear that some spasmoid wrote it (hence my reference to off your rocker). But perhaps it was an attempt at humor....or sarcasm? DG Allow me to clarify. It wasnt literal or sincere. Threw my own actions and my own post, I was providing an example of how the attitude of "Open Mindness and Acceptance For All" can be used to squash and silence alternative viewpoints that are valid and need to be heard even if they are not politically correct. You seem to have an axe to grind with me. You can go ahead and grind it all you want. You can infere and twist and take things from my post that wasnt there. But until you learn how to actually debate and not just argue, you wont be receiving much response from me.

adaddysgirl -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:14:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit There seems to be this huge misconception out there that just because I tolerate your choice and support your right to make this choice that I somehow have to like or approve it. Actually, i don't think there's any misconception at all. i think you have made that point very clear. If people would pull their heads out of their ass and listen to the negative opinions instead of constantly insisting that everyone universally approve of their stupid and idiotic idea to drench themselves in gasoline and light themselves on fire as a form of "fire play", things might actually get learned. People don't learn by calling them stupid and idiotic. Is it not enough to say something like "Well i would never do what you do" or "That is way too extreme for me" without belittling them? Or is that what you need to do? However, people on these boards who cant seem to provide any arguments or reasons behind their negative opinion when they share it do tend to annoy me a little bit since it provides really no substance to the discussion. Really not even logical enough for me to respond to. DG

MadRabbit -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:21:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl You see MR...i never said you should keep your opinions to yourself. i did say: voice your opinion (if you feel so inclined); extend a helping hand (if you feel so inclined); but just try to realize that some people do not want your help....and that at some point, enough is enough. And maybe someday you'll even be able to do it without calling others stupid and idiotic because they don't share your same standards. And that is your right. By the same token, that is how others feel about your opinions. So should i call you stupid because you don't see things the way i do? Okay, it seems you have managed to actually conjure something that resembles an argument in this section so allow me to try and address it. First, I would like you to please quote where exactly I stated anything about making an ad homeium attack against individuals. What I said exactly in all my posts was in reference to activities and actions as stupid and idiotic, not the people themselves. It is my opinion that soaking yourself in gasoline and lighting yourself on fire is a stupid and idiotic activity. If you wish to engage in this activity, feal free to. Engaging in such activitiy does not necessary make you stupid or idiotic. It simply means that you are engaging in an activity that in my opinion is stupid and idiotic. I have judged this activity and come to the value that the activity is stupid and idiotic to me. It is important that I value this activity as stupid and idiotic because by valueing such activity as stupid and idiotic, I stop myself from engaging in it. If I valued the activity as "brilliant and wonderful", then I would probably drench myself in gasoline and light myself on fire. Why? Because I find it to be a wonderful and brilliant idea. So perhaps I should change my opinion of the activity for the sake of other people's feelings and engage in the activity of gasoline and fire? Or maybe I should lie? Which is it? Do you beleive people should all form the same opinions about activities or do you think people should lie? If people dont want to hear my opinions, they can tell me. I will gladly respect that. I fully recognize that people might not want my help and respect their right not to take it when offered. However, on a forum like this that is the proper place for discussion and the free exchange of ideas or opinions, I feel no particular need to restrict myself because of some possibility that people wont want to listen to my idea. If they dont want to listen to my idea, they can not post on a forum of discussion where opinions and ideas are exchanged. If they dont want their activity or choices to be subjected to my opinion, they should not post on a forum of discussion where opinions are freely exchanged. Perhaps you advocate censorship? And who better to decide what opinions should or should not be heard on an open forum of discussion then someone who cannot seem to post without contradicting her own viewpoints.

adaddysgirl -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:26:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy That would be me. I'm the one who gets to choose.....Mod11 and I have had some pretty stirring conversations ....And she feels that I should be utilized as the "moral barometer" of CM.....It works like this...I am right and you are wrong...Pretty fucking easy. Well ya better move over....'cause you got a few more competing for the title. Also it would be a thoughtful and gracious act on the behalf of adaddysgirl if she would refrain from ending her posts with "DG" ....How about using "adg" in the future? Though highly improbable, I would despair over the fact if some of the healed "methadone" users on this site would every attribute your thoughts as to being mine. D.G., i have been a member of this site since 2004 and have used DG in both my emails and on here. i see no reason to change it now. And i never suggested you change yours (as you are suggesting to me). i wanted the clarification because as you can see, when we both post, it can get confusing when someone references DG when they mean you. And as you can see, i have enough shit here to deal with (as do you)....so adding to that by the D.G. vs DG confusion...well....i was just striving for clarity. That shortcut was given to me by people who wrote me....it wasn't even something i started. It's kinda funny that i really hadn't noticed many (if any) calling you DG....until just recently. As always, DG Disclaimer....There was never any discussions with mod11 on any subjects other than her suggesting I should try and refrain from being such an a-hole.

MadRabbit -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:26:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit If people would pull their heads out of their ass and listen to the negative opinions instead of constantly insisting that everyone universally approve of their stupid and idiotic idea to drench themselves in gasoline and light themselves on fire as a form of "fire play", things might actually get learned. People don't learn by calling them stupid and idiotic. Is it not enough to say something like "Well i would never do what you do" or "That is way too extreme for me" without belittling them? Or is that what you need to do? Sure, they do. They "learn" that my opinion of their activity is that its stupid and idiotic. They also learn the reasons why I find it to be stupid and idiotic. quote: ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit However, people on these boards who cant seem to provide any arguments or reasons behind their negative opinion when they share it do tend to annoy me a little bit since it provides really no substance to the discussion. Really not even logical enough for me to respond to. DG I am going to take this to mean "I cant think of an argument", because it is purely logical. If all people contributed to these forums was simply statements of "Well I think its stupid" without providing any reasons or arguments as to why they find the activity to be stupid, then nothing would be learned here except that a bunch of people find things to be stupid for unknown reasons. I personally dont call that substance or worth reading. Your posts are a primary example. About 70% of what you have written is nothing more than your personal opinion about how dumb stupid and wrong I am without anything to support why you find it to be that way. This is why I have not replied to most of your posts, because I simply cant without reducing this discussion (If we can label with that in some rational sense of seriosness) to the level of two children hurling insults.

adaddysgirl -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:40:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Whether thats the thread or not, I am not gonna comment. Why not? Because I am not looking to start drama. I am looking to convey a point and express an analogy to help express that point. Maybe I made that example up. Maybe its another thread. Maybe its been a few months and my mind has distorted what the thread actually said. Its all germane to this discussion, because it has nothing to do with what I am trying to say in my post. Some people insist on dragging up old threads and saying "Hey this is the thread he is talking about" Certain individuals insist on quoting from that thread, saying "this is what he means even though he never said this is what it means", focusing on the sole segment of the post that could incite drama if people continue to focus on it and made it the issue at hand, and ignoring the actual point and substance of the post entirely. The only one fueling drama in these threads is certain individuals who insist on making this about the hypothetical post that was never introduced as the factual reference and not about the viewpoint itself. If at some point you would actually like to engage in debate over my viewpoint, please feel free to. If you want to try and make this about drama based on your conjecture of what thread I was talking about, go right ahead. Its just making you out to be more of a hyprocite. You're really funny MR. First of all, you are the one who brought up that post...i didn't even know it existed. Then it was pointed out to me so i went and read it. If you say your example was made up, or another thread, or not clear now....well, i can only say that it did sound very similar to what you described and whoever provided the link must have thought so too. i am not making that thread the issue at hand. i read it, read your opinion on it, and posted about the two. Period. So now i am a hypocrite? i think you are confused MR. DG

adaddysgirl -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:46:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Allow me to clarify. It wasnt literal or sincere. Threw my own actions and my own post, I was providing an example of how the attitude of "Open Mindness and Acceptance For All" can be used to squash and silence alternative viewpoints that are valid and need to be heard even if they are not politically correct. You seem to have an axe to grind with me. You can go ahead and grind it all you want. You can infere and twist and take things from my post that wasnt there. But until you learn how to actually debate and not just argue, you wont be receiving much response from me. It's funny how you and the DQ seem to think i have an axe to grind with (both of) you. Well, it goes like this....you post, i respond, you respond, i respond, etc. That's not an axe to grind....it's called responding to another's post. Or am i missing something here? So i am arguing....and you are what? Debating? Should i insert a chuckle in here now? And if you care not to respond further, then by all means, that is your prerogative. DG

MadRabbit -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:47:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Whether thats the thread or not, I am not gonna comment. Why not? Because I am not looking to start drama. I am looking to convey a point and express an analogy to help express that point. Maybe I made that example up. Maybe its another thread. Maybe its been a few months and my mind has distorted what the thread actually said. Its all germane to this discussion, because it has nothing to do with what I am trying to say in my post. Some people insist on dragging up old threads and saying "Hey this is the thread he is talking about" Certain individuals insist on quoting from that thread, saying "this is what he means even though he never said this is what it means", focusing on the sole segment of the post that could incite drama if people continue to focus on it and made it the issue at hand, and ignoring the actual point and substance of the post entirely. The only one fueling drama in these threads is certain individuals who insist on making this about the hypothetical post that was never introduced as the factual reference and not about the viewpoint itself. If at some point you would actually like to engage in debate over my viewpoint, please feel free to. If you want to try and make this about drama based on your conjecture of what thread I was talking about, go right ahead. Its just making you out to be more of a hyprocite. You're really funny MR. First of all, you are the one who brought up that post...i didn't even know it existed. Then it was pointed out to me so i went and read it. If you say your example was made up, or another thread, or not clear now....well, i can only say that it did sound very similar to what you described and whoever provided the link must have thought so too. i am not making that thread the issue at hand. i read it, read your opinion on it, and posted about the two. Period. So now i am a hypocrite? i think you are confused MR. DG Please reference where exactly I made a link or reference to the thread in question. Other people did that and not me. Yes, you are quite a hyprocrite. You bash me for referring to activites as stupid and idiotic with personal attacks against me. You constantly pontificate about how I should keep in mind that certain individuals might not want to hear my opinion, but have no consideration or respect for whether or not I want to hear your wondeful opinion. You pontificate about the importance of not judging or labeling people, but label me as a Drama King. You accuse me and speak out again fueling drama in a thread, but insist on constantly fueling that drama by trying to provoke me into commenting on a part of my thread that I am trying to not make into drama. Its an analogy. One that could be fictious or could be an error on my part or could be completely innaccurate. If you would stop trying to make it the center of attention, there would be no drama, but yet...you continue. Its not my intention of hanging people out to dry here or putting anyone on the spot. You are the one accomplishing that threw your own persistance.

MadRabbit -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 10:51:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Allow me to clarify. It wasnt literal or sincere. Threw my own actions and my own post, I was providing an example of how the attitude of "Open Mindness and Acceptance For All" can be used to squash and silence alternative viewpoints that are valid and need to be heard even if they are not politically correct. You seem to have an axe to grind with me. You can go ahead and grind it all you want. You can infere and twist and take things from my post that wasnt there. But until you learn how to actually debate and not just argue, you wont be receiving much response from me. It's funny how you and the DQ seem to think i have an axe to grind with (both of) you. Well, it goes like this....you post, i respond, you respond, i respond, etc. That's not an axe to grind....it's called responding to another's post. Or am i missing something here? So i am arguing....and you are what? Debating? Should i insert a chuckle in here now? And if you care not to respond further, then by all means, that is your prerogative. DG In the hopes that you might learn something... Argueing would be submitting post like yours that consists of nothing more than personal attacks and jabs against another individual. Debating would be where two people deal directly with two opposing viewpoints and argue the logic. If you want to continue this, be my guest. I am having a blast, am very good at this, and have no problems continueing to box you into a corner.

adaddysgirl -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 11:28:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit In the hopes that you might learn something... Learn something? me? From you? Fat chance. Argueing would be submitting post like yours that consists of nothing more than personal attacks and jabs against another individual. As you have done in your posts? Debating would be where two people deal directly with two opposing viewpoints and argue the logic. And my viewpoint is that: 1) Adults are allowed to live the lifestyle they choose and if that includes D/s, then they are allowed to live within the parameters they have established (and if that means no limits, then so be it) 2) If it appears someone is in what ~i~ consider an abusive relationship, i can feel free to voice that opinion....and i can feel free to offer them support on getting out. 3) But if someone is not asking to get out, then i can have my say....and move on....realizing that telling them how stupid their choices are is not going to make them accept any advice from me. And i feel no particular need to denigrate how they have chosen to live. And your viewpoint is? If you want to continue this, be my guest. I am having a blast, am very good at this, and have no problems continueing to box you into a corner. i am good at it too MR. At 50 years old, with 4 brothers and 2 sons (all who like to seem to debate....imagine that).....and working as an investigator where 90% of my coworkers are guys who, well, think they know it all....i don't think your ongoing inanity is going to box me into a corner. But since i have some RL things to attend to here, i'm afraid i have to break. But i will be back. Tata for now! DG

MadRabbit -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 11:53:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl And my viewpoint is that: 1) Adults are allowed to live the lifestyle they choose and if that includes D/s, then they are allowed to live within the parameters they have established (and if that means no limits, then so be it) Okay. Great. I have clearly stated that I fully support freedom of choice... quote: ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl 2) If it appears someone is in what ~i~ consider an abusive relationship, i can feel free to voice that opinion....and i can feel free to offer them support on getting out. Okay great...I have said the same things... quote: ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl 3) But if someone is not asking to get out, then i can have my say....and move on....realizing that telling them how stupid their choices are is not going to make them accept any advice from me. And i feel no particular need to denigrate how they have chosen to live. Okay...so please reference where exactly in my posts that I said I am pushing my beliefs on other people or shoving help down their throats. That is what you inferred from my post and not what was written. If you are going to constantly argue whatever the hell you want without actually taking the time to read what was written, its going to leave you open to error. I'm glad you find value in saying "Yeah hey thats a great idea!" regardless of the situation. I dont. I have personal opinions. They are my subjective personal opinions. If you cannot take criticism or keep some broadness of mind to realize that other people are going to disagree with you, then, its my opinion, that you arent going to get very far in life. I said, in the proper context and time, I will gladly share those opinions when they are welcome or appropriate. I said nothing about shoving my beliefs down other people's throats or forcing them on them. Ignore me. Dont listen to me. Have some conviction in your own beliefs and opinions and dont allow mine to influence yours unless you want to. Dont expect me to not develop my own personal center or change that personal center or lie to you about that personal center. I think eating shit is disqusting and unhealthy. That is my opinion. I will provide X, Y, and Z as to why I personally came to that opinion. If you want to do things that I find personally disqusting and unhealthy, you go right ahead. I will support your right to do that and wont try to stop you unless your willing to listen to me or take my help. You can provide an alternative viewpoint and try and change that viewpoint. I will listen and make a decision after I heard it. You can go and eat shit all you want as long as its not in my home. I wont pursue you or bang on your door and remind you how disquesting what you are doing is. If you ask me face to face that opinion, I will share it. I will share it openly on a forum of discussion such as this where opinions are supposed to freely be heard. My entire viewpoint was about how it is ok to judge, have negative opinion and to express them in the appropriate context or forum. You have taken what I have said and gone off on some tangent created in your own mind.

Aswad -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 1:07:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists But…. Does that mean the rest of us should just turn away or applaud and support someone that makes a choice that lead to their destruction in their given relationship? Yes, please. At least until people learn to grade the scale between "applaud/support" and "bash/attack". quote: “One has not only the right of choice, but a moral responsibility to support another’s right to choose. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to rise against harmful choices!” That statement is of a very different character. The original states that morality dictates a specific course of action that is independent of law, or more specifically, that a law that is (using moral reasoning) held to be just is one that is moral and should be followed, whereas a law that is (again, using moral reasoning) held to be unjust is one that is immoral and should be disregarded, perhaps even actively thwarted through acts of civil disobedience. It is the assertion that one cannot alter morality by altering laws. quote: What kind of a friend, person, human if we ignore another person’s destructive choices. What kind of a friend, person or human would we be if we deny them the right to choose? quote: What kind of moral person are we to watch idly by as someone makes choices to that bring their own harm or harm to others. "A friend will help you move. A good friend will help you move a body." (Proverb) quote: However, I will also not be silent to their choice that in my view is harmful. Which is just fine, really. A bit of common courtesy is even better. Showing that you accept that it's their choice is perfect. quote: Hats off to those that that defend a person’s right to choose. But standing ovation to those that balance it by speaking against harmful choices. So, in other words... hats off to those who support freedom, but standing ovation to those that attack anyone that attempts to use it in a manner they don't agree with... got it. Freedom of speech is there to protect unpopular opinions, because popular ones don't need to be defended. Freedom of choice (if we had it) would be there to protect unpopular choices, because popular ones don't need to be defended, either. Health, al-Aswad.

Aswad -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 1:09:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin Did you just admit to being a person with morals? Only some sociopaths are without morals. Even animals have morals. He just admitted to having very common and prevalent morals. Health, al-Aswad.

Aswad -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 1:11:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Redoubt All morality is, is simply a social majority decision. Err... no. All moral inheritance, like cultural inheritance, is a majority decision in the group it's inherited from (be that group one person, or six billion of them). Morality itself, however, is a personal thing. The social aspect only enters the picture because most people choose to internalize their inherited morality more or less intact. It does not mean one should conflate the process of developing inheritance with the quality and process of morality. Health, al-Aswad.

Aswad -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 1:24:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse Don't we have laws already in place that those that practice BDSM and M/s, D/s type relationships already break? If so, which laws do we say, "well, sure, it's okay for other people to be held to those laws but ME, well WE are the exception to that law" and then we all start bellowing for our personal freedoms. That's the bit which really pushes my buttons. The sheer hubris with which people flaunt their own hypocrisy. quote: And, just as a parent watching a child suffer failures and lifes bumps and bruises, how can we always say that our interference is helping rather than hindering? As always, the time and place to help is when someone asks for it. And, as always, the manner in which to help is one the recipient deems helpful. Anything else is interfering with and/or controlling someone's lives. Which had better only be done when you rightly have that power over them. In other words, when you're their dominant or owner. (Kids are intrinsically in a power dynamic.) quote: Again, I am not saying that I believe WHATEVER a person wants to do is okay with me and we should just sit back and watch. What I am saying is that how to determine the lines that can or cannot be crossed, is the problem. From my angle, that opinion does not fly, but that's a matter of preference. Hypocrisy is the objective problem; the POV is the subjective one. Health, al-Aswad.

Aswad -> RE: Defend the Right! Attack the Wrong! (9/22/2007 1:58:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble [...] and my heart is firmly entrenched in M/s and that's not because of my childhood.. it's in spite of it. [;)] Along with what daddysprop (IIRC) said, this is the best line I've seen about it, so far. A predator knows its prey. A person with a sub/slave nature is a much "better" (from the POV of the predator) choice of prey than a person who does not have that nature. Coming to terms with such an encounter and overcoming it clears the way for yet again embracing one's nature, but this time with a "predator" who isn't going to eat the "prey", but rather enter into a symbiotic relationship with it, including protecting it from "hungry" predators. A genuine standing ovation on my part for anyone who can come home, despite the wolves outside the door. Health, al-Aswad.

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625