Aspies For Freedom - The liberal reign of terror on this forum

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

A few days ago, I started this thread in an attempt to promote mutual respect and tolerance and to get an idea how tolerant people on this site really are. I noticed that those who tend to preach tolerance all the time often are intolerant hatemongers themselves with regards to people who don't share their views.

The end result of this thread only confirmed the latter. In spite of my call for tolerance, I was being called all kinds of names by a bunch of flaming liberals who behaved in the most obnoxious and intolerant way, while they - ironicly - accused me of intolerance. The reason for this apparently is my stating that :
* ) homosexuality is a deviance
* ) multi-culturalism is bunk
* ) wicca is bunk

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

EvilZakkie Wrote:

Ah, good. I didn't think this would happen so quickly - this way, he can't make the claim that he wasn't aware of the forum rules.

Report will be written and submitted today.

There is nothing I said that I can't rationally defend.
<Fairy story cut for reasons of space>
We're not living in a fantasy world, people. Multi-culturalism doesn't work, "representative democracy" doesn't work, capitalism only makes the rich man richer and the media is NOT independent. Open your nose and start smelling the ***, rather than shooting the messenger.

The stuff in red/bold is just an opinion; I have seen no rational defence yet for any of it, just screaming because others disagree.

Try to convince me? I don't think so -

a) the statements are clearly against the rules of this site as they are blanket statements about orientation and race.

b) as a member of a multi-cultural family, living in a multi-cultural, representative democracy I know that those things do work, to the overall benefit of society.

c) as someone who has grown up with people of all genders, orientations, neurotypes and races I am not prepared to label anyone 'deviant'; we are all different in some way.

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

You and EvilZakkie are both dillusional if you honestly believe that I said anything that's racist, homophobic or whatever you guys accuse me of.

Korrigan Wrote:

There has been much use of language that is not exactly appropriate. That I agree with. But as it has just been said, you can say a lot using flowery politically correct words as well. Things much worse than swear words.

There was no misquoting that I saw.

The post from EvilZakkie, and I am sure he will correct me if I am wrong, was regarding the posts that Illusion made, and was warned twice about, and now made again.

Even if you mis-spell it, using a mental disorder as an insult is offensive and against the rules of this site.

earthmonkey Wrote:

HA! <3 your name, Tigger! (especially appropriate to this thread.. Wink

)

Thank you! Wink

I also thought that it was appropriate to the oxymoronic title! Cool

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

Tigger_the_Left_Wing Wrote:

The stuff in red/bold is just an opinion; I have seen no rational defence yet for any of it, just screaming because others disagree.

Just because you could see no rational defence in that particular post, that doesn't mean I didn't make any rational defense elsewhere or that I'm unable to rationally defend them. If I am allowed to do so, I would love to go in detail on each of these issues on a purely rational basis, but I'm afraid the self-righteous EvilZakkie will have me banned before I even get the chance.

You mean "I would tell you my rational defence if I had one, but I am going to waffle on about something else instead until I get banned, and then I can say that the ban prevented me having my say"

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

Tigger_the_Left_Wing Wrote:

a) the statements are clearly against the rules of this site as they are blanket statements about orientation and race.

They are opinions based on rational argumentation and facts. These opinions have as much right to be ousted as any other opinion.

See my reply above.

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

Tigger_the_Left_Wing Wrote:

b) as a member of a multi-cultural family, living in a multi-cultural, representative democracy I know that those things do work, to the overall benefit of society.

When I look around me, I see people isolated from their communities, I see people from both sides using racism as a defense mechanism, I see people from both sides trying to uphold contradicting cultures, I see people waging war and waging terrorist acts for the ability to rule one's own land. Man is a tribal animal and will always remain a tribal animal. Only as a more or less homogenous group can man achieve the highest of its achievements. Multi-culturalism leads to division, which in turn leads to weakness and corruption.

When I look around me, I see people joyfully sharing their interesting cultures with one another; I see people respectfully discussing sharing a previously divided land; I see families with people of three different races and cultures, living in a fourth society, having a successful life; I see multiculturalism leading to harmony and diversity and the acceptance of all.

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

Tigger_the_Left_Wing Wrote:

c) as someone who has grown up with people of all genders, orientations, neurotypes and races I am not prepared to label anyone 'deviant'; we are all different in some way.

It's just a matter of perspective. I find it peculiar how people are outraged when I tell them I feel more affinity with my own people than with another people and how they get equally outraged when I tell them that all animals are living beings deserve to be respected and should not be regarded as a form of life inferior to man. They call me a supremacist, but they do not realise that they are the supremacists as they put man above nature. I, as a pagan, see man as just a part of nature and bound to the same rules and principles of the wolf pack.

You are a pagan, saying Wicca is bunk!?

Riiiiight....

I have never put Man above Nature. As to your example, wolves are perfectly happy to mate with dogs, as it happens; they see that they are all members of the same species, even if the appearance/behaviour is different.

And there is plenty of homosexual behaviour in Nature, including life-long pair-bonding. It is just a different kind of normal, along with hetersexuality, bisexuality and asexuality and all other flavours of sexuality.

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

outsideL00kinN Wrote:

Tigger_the_Left_Wing Wrote:

Even if you mis-spell it, using a mental disorder as an insult is offensive and against the rules of this site.

Thank you, Tigger. Well spotted. Er, I mean, striped. Well, you know what I mean Big Grin .

I just find it mindboggling to see how little common sense and how much prejucide there appears to exist among most people in this thread. It's like they're all living in the Matrix and they're about to lynch me for trying to make them see what the Matrix really is.

And OK, I misspell a few words here and there. English happens to be my third language (although I have to admit that my French - my second language - isn't nearly as good as my English). Do you write completely flawless when using your second and third languages on a forum that doesn't allow editing after posting?

I wasn't criticising your spelling, stop using straw-man arguments; I was criticising you using a mental disorder as an insult.

Actually, atypical, ALL instances of the use of mental disorders as insults are reported.

Crazy isn't a diagnosis.

'Bad language' isn't reported, except in the sixteen-and-under forum.

In the example above, ocampo was being sarcastic. I'm a Catholic and didn't find it offensive - perhaps a fundamentalist might, but then fundamentalists find the fact of her lesbianism offensive and she has every right to fight back against the homophobia. The OP said that homosexuality was deviant. It isn't. It is perfectly normal. It is only deviant in his opinion but he didn't say "I think that homosexuality is deviant" he put it out there as if it was absolute truth.

Worse than using bad language is to tell someone that their faith is 'bunk' and then claim the moral high ground of rational argument. Also, the OP is personally against people mixing with those of other races. For all sorts of reasons it is offensive to tell the rest of the world that their opposing view is 'bunk', again, as if his personal belief is a universal truth!

IlluSionS667 Wrote:

Max the Bear Wrote:

Your worship of homogeneity -- cultural, racial purity in its Prussian glory -- extends not just to removing and/or exterminating other cultures and other political beliefs. Neurodiversity is no more to be tolerated than ethnic diversity. It's not just other cultures, other sexual orientation that would be seen as pollutants in your superior, pure new society. So would people on the autistic spectrum.

I strongly disagree here. An folk by itself is very neurodiverse and every type of human can function like an organ within the large body that is the folk. If a certain part of the folk is eliminated, that could be like taking out an organ or a limb. A society can't survive without its intellectuals any more than it can live without its manual laborers. It can't survive without its women any more than it can survive without its men. The same way, neurotypicals and people within the spectrum each have their own gifts that can fill a specific get relevant role for the survival of the group.

In spite of the individual differences, however, the group shares a genetic and cultural tie that binds them as a group. Inter-cultural and inter-ethnic contact can become very close but it will never be able to achieve the same depth of contact that can exist between two individuals of the same folk with the same ideals, hence where both blood and culture are shared.

By that logic, the highest form of human interaction would be incest.

In my immediate family (parents, siblings, their spouses and children and mine) there are Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, and various Protestant forms of Christianity; Moslems; Agnostics; Atheists.

There are people of many nations; Scotland, Wales, England, Ireland, Greece, Iran, South Korea; and that excludes the racial mix of earlier generations.

As an apparently white Englishwoman I accept that my blood cannot possibly be 'ethnically/genetically pure' (strange concept Rolleyes

) because over the eons the various paler tribes have intermingled with each other and with other peoples. There have been dark-skinned people living in England alone for well over two thousand years.

Look at any 'white' family and see the wide variety of eye and hair colour amongst them; that alone tells a story of genetic intermingling.

The best possible outcome for the human race in all its difference is that we cease to categorise eachother according to appearance and all start treating eachother as respected individuals.

As far as specialist breeding is concerned; actually, animal breeders do use incest all the time and accept that the genetic problems (e.g. hip displasia in in-bred German Shepherds) will occur and that the defective animals will be destroyed.

Also that when a disease appears to which an in-bred population has no immunity, that population will be wiped out (e.g. potatoes in Ireland during the great Famine)

The ban-hammer hasn't yet fallen; but there is still lacking a reasoned argument to back up the original assertions; i.e.

* ) homosexuality is a deviance

If we are to take mere population minority status into account, then male-ness is deviant as the ratio of females to males is generally in the 102/104:100 range

* ) multi-culturalism is bunk

It works in many societies. It is closed societies which are most likely to end up genetically damaged; and violence is most prevalent in intolerant societies, i.e. those where people aren't allowed to be themselves but are expected to ape the majority.

* ) wicca is bunk

Well, that one could be said of any faith, couldn't it? Unless you have conclusive proof that your beliefs are absolutely the correct ones and everyone else's are 'bunk', you should simply allow everyone their own beliefs without insulting them.

honestjohn Wrote:

ocampo Wrote:

I'm sure you can reassure him of that in PM, atypical.

At least until he gets banned.

Which person, simen or illusion?
Are you asking if illusion Pm'd me? He did, yesterday, to talk about religion, his, mine, how many times I changed mine etc., an exchnage of thoughts and history.
Did I get Pm'd also about his opinion of whether or not he thinks I am thinking un-emotionally, yes. So?
AND, am I ALWAYS supportive of ANYONES right to give an opinion and have natural back and forth on this forum, yes.
Next time I'll respond in PM. I can't imagine what else to write here.

Have natural back and forth? What?

Hmmm. Thanks for sharing that. I imagine you really don't know what else to write publically, no...

Mahler5 Wrote:

honestjohn Wrote:

Last I read SImen wanted Illusion to prove things (show me the link, I want statistics) and now someone else wants Illusion to prove things. Illusion just proved, a bunch of times that he meant nothing bad about using the word deviant. That was proven.

What now, is someone on here actually going to prove the existence of the "right wing" conspiracy or the boogie man?

I give up on this thread. To what end? I see illusion taking way more than he ever dished out.

I recall that when you first came you supported the aims on the HOMEPAGE and copied and pasted the bottom of that section in a post.

I have no problem thinking that in real life he is a 'nice' young man-treats his dogs and other people 'well' because he thinks he is 'respectful'.
Everyone has an opinion. Not every opinion should be 'tolerated' or accepted either-regardless how much you may 'like' someone.

If one is going to have such 'contraversial' ideas-and complain about this forum-one is going to get reactions.

I think infallable illusion can handle the 'dishing out' though don't you? -he has said that he has a 'spine' so he's not that offended when 'criticised' remember?

If anyone wants to debate-(and that's his issue-that he's not seemingly 'allowed' to do that here) one usually cites examples other than their own experience to 'prove' things. He hasn't at all.

Hitler liked dogs and was apparently an extremely good artist.

i.e. no-one, or no-thing, is inherently, completely bad, just as no-one/thing is completely and inherently good. I have no doubt that IRL, Illusion may treat his dogs well, treat other people with respect, and generally present as an affable guy. Just as IRL, I tend to be extremely quiet and good-humoured. IRL, I'd walk away from this kind of nonsense. After doing sociology at uni, you've heard all of these opinions and theories so many times that it is *** BORING and (almost) LAUGHABLE. I have seen soooooooooo many people in a tutorial getting themselves so vehemently angered at discussing theories and it never once entering into their heads 'people don't agree with me here... why don't I talk to people on my wavelength instead'.

After a while, it becomes amusing watching these little dictators believe in their own huff and puff. Watching them defend themselves, honestly believing they have the answer to everything. Hilarious. I wouldn't dream of telling people my sociological theories are great, or fantastic, or that they're right, because they're not. They're only right for those who believe they're right, and wrong for those who believe they're wrong. Nuancy. I'm humble enough to admit I know *** all about life, and so does Illusion. So does everyone. Some of us just admit to it more keenly than others. Personally, I find that those who create little theories like Illusion's are those who are desperately (subconsciously, most likely) trying to make sense of a world that has none. There is no logic in life, and that is the worst thing you can tell an Aspie because ultimately we are driven to rationalise everything. The notion of 'going with the flow' is an alien one.

Ultimately, as far as I'm concerned, this forum is about Aspergers predominantly. Its meant to be somewhere where Aspies can be themselves, learn more about how *** confusing the world is and how to deal with it. Crackpot political theories don't cut it somehow.

No, really atypical, you don't have to PM me to clarify. Even this literal minded Aspie can read between the lines and get your number.

honestjohn Wrote:

Oh, do I Think that black people are less intelligent than people with any other skin color, yellow, res, white, tan, light brown? OF course not. Did someone on here say that? I don't know.
Are there statistics that measure IQ's on all continents. Some continents have more dark skin (hotter climates) and (less developed educational systems) Can people have read or seen statistics about IQ's? yes.
why ask me?

Your friend Illusion did. Do you actually read through, thoroughly, the posts of the person you feel is hard done by?

Your arse must be getting cramp from the wood of your fence.

Apparently we should understand logic more, being Aspies. Those of us that dare to show our emotions are NT-like and don't have spines, you see.

And yeah, I agree re 'what is the point' with regards to debating that kind of thing on an Aspergers support board. AFF does have plenty of off topic things but its hardly designed to cause offence. Which this blatantly was.

And where is that banhammer of doom...

Oh noes!!!!!!1!!! can i haz spine?

im in ur spinal fluid

plottin ur death

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18