Sex and the Religious-Left

[Gary Childress]

Self-identity, self-definition...

"Self" identity is a misnomer. We seem to be pawns in your game of metaphysical naming. We can be witches or elves or trolls or goblins or something and you can be the saint coming to the rescue by purging the world of our diseases.

But we're certainly not "men", "real" men march in lockstep to their true nature.

[Alexis Jacobi]

The term Nazi is a trope-word. An underhanded, unethical rhetorical usage that really has no meaning.

[FlashDangerpants]

In this context more rational, less irrational. More sober or grounded, less emotionally moved (as you seem to be).

There is nothing unethical in any of the 4 topics I presented. But you •hear• in them grave evils and like Flash resort to the Nazi trope.

I suggest this is programming more than sound, considered thought.

Flash concords:

It's not about war, it's about blood and soil. He's equating masculinity with sacrifice for the greater good of the one race, one folk, and all that shit.

Self-identity, self-definition = evil Nazism.

Is there such a thing as "good" Nazism?

He just needs it to not actually be called that. He cites a long list of neo-nazis, but they have to be referred to by some delicate euphemism such as "dissident". Likewise he is talking in that passage you highlighted about racial seperatism and he is suggesting that it is manly guard against race mixing, but he cannot say as much directly, he must drop hints.

however, he has zero problem identifying me as evil, but is unable to identify Hitler as evil, so all the two faced word games in the world can't hide what that means.

[Gary Childress]

The term Nazi is a trope-word. An underhanded, unethical rhetorical usage that really has no meaning.

Just like calling people "faggots" or "weaklings".

[Alexis Jacobi]

[Man, Gary is really charging forward! He has been aroused at a fundamental ethical and moral point! He’ll Set things straight for sure!]

[Alexis Jacobi]

A faggot is a faggot when you think about it.

And so is a weakling.

[Gary Childress]

A faggot is a faggot when you think about it.

And so is a weakling.

Same with Nazis I guess.

[Alexis Jacobi]

however, he has zero problem identifying me as evil, but is unable to identify Hitler as evil

So let me get this straight: you the moral subjectivist, the anti-moralist, wish to discuss what is evil and what is good?!?

What a trip!

[Alexis Jacobi]

A faggot is a faggot when you think about it.

And so is a weakling.

Same with Nazis I guess.

Yes: the Nazis were definitely Nazis.

[Gary Childress]

A faggot is a faggot when you think about it.

And so is a weakling.

Same with Nazis I guess.

Yes: the Nazis were definitely Nazis.

Sorry, I ought to say xenophobes are xenophobes, I suppose. \_(*_*)_/

[Harbal]

I understood that part, but what does to transmute my mire into something positively actionable mean?

Any ideological position, say about social conduct and ethics, involves ideas or aspirations that in relation to one can take action.

If the project is, for example, renovation of the corrupted self, then some remedial choices will be taken. That means “action”. (But ceasing to act in some area can also be seen as action, if you get my point).

Those people today (in politics, in social affairs) who propose remediation do so in relation to actionable ideas.

Clear now?

So if you do not approve of my social conduct, or my ethical stance, some course of action is justified, in order to bring those things more in line with what you consider acceptable? Is that what you mean?

And what form would this action take? Am I the one who is supposed to take action in response to some process of persuasion, or will the action be imposed on me by some authority or other?

You are being vague again. You have obviously arrived at certain conclusions about me, so, based on those conclusions, what, exactly, could I expect to experience in your world?

[FlashDangerpants]

however, he has zero problem identifying me as evil, but is unable to identify Hitler as evil

So let me get this straight: you the moral subjectivist, the anti-moralist, wish to discuss what is evil and what is good?!?

What a trip!

I can easily say Hitler was evil, I can give reasons and provide a rationale. Likewise, I can say that your dishonesty matches that of Immanuel Can, and that this makes you a weak and sad little shit stain of a man. None of this results in inconsistency with my meta-ethical claims regarding the logical status of ethical popositions. You have no understanding of meta-ethics at all, and cannot sustain any such conversation. Also you will sulk again if I mention a bunch of books on the matter, so what's the point of fronting like that?

[Gary Childress]

xenophobia. noun. xe·​no·​pho·​bia ˌzen-ə-ˈfō-bē-ə ˌzēn- : fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign.

[Alexis Jacobi]

The topic of who, and what, is evil is one that can only be broached in a spirit of fairness and balance.

Unless of course one is deeply involved and committed to underhanded rhetorics.

You entire argument (quote/unquote) is now established in this form: Either you declare that •Hitler is Evil• …

… or I will assert this indicates you are associated with that Ontological Malevolence, are a supporter of Hitler, and are as evil.

Grownups don’t play in these semiotic pits.

Likewise, I can say that your dishonesty matches that of Immanuel Can, and that this makes you a weak and sad little shit stain of a man.

A false comparison. Convenient, but false.

You will proceed down an established line at this point.

[Gary Childress]

The topic of who, and what, is evil is one that can only be broached in a spirit of fairness and balance.

Unless of course one is deeply involved and committed to underhanded rhetorics.

You entire argument (quote/unquote) is now established in this form: Either you declare that •Hitler is Evil• …

… or I will assert this indicates you are associated with that Ontological Malevolence, are a supporter of Hitler, and are as evil.

Grownups don’t play in these sand pits.

I don't know. I'm 56 years old, not a child and yet I can see fair reasons for Flash's point. Oh, wait, I'm being "childish". Metaphysics according to AJ.

How do we all fit in your world, AJ? Or do we? Is the world just not big enough to house "faggots", "weaklings" and others who don't think as you do?