Originally posted by Astyanax
Perhaps this is because you share it. Voyez:
That doesn't make an awful lot of sense.
How would sharing an emotion make any difference to whether I spotted it or not ?
If anything, I'd be
more likely to spot it, as I would possible recognise some of the signs.
I haven't spotted any ''hate'' on ATS, because I am not privy to the poster's emotional disposition while posting it.
Originally posted by Astyanax
Your parents, wife and children were murdered by a gang of violent thugs. You saw it happen. There were dozens of other witnesses. There is absolutely
no question that it was done, or who did it. In fact, the thugs were caught and put in gaol.
Sorry, but this is tilting slightly towards an ''appeal to emotion''.
The problem is that you're using your own opinion that something is self-evident or inarguable to argue against other people's opinions that it's
not.
I can't see too much difference between the premise of Holocaust deniers, and people that say that the US government orchestrated the 11th of
September terrorist attacks, to gain sympathy and justification for invading Afghanistan and Iraq.
Originally posted by Astyanax
Then along I come, and say to you, 'Ya boo sucks, it's all a lie, nobody murdered your family, you're just saying that to gain the world's
sympathy and various other advantages.'
Would I do that if I didn't hate you? I might if I was mad, I suppose.
Again, take the example of the 11th of September attacks, and some of the more far out theories that abound around the events.
The ''no-planes'' theory is denying that people were even aboard the flights.
Can it really be logically argued that people who support this idea are doing so out of ''hate'' towards the passengers on the planes ?
I don't think so.
Yet, it's exactly the same scenario as you have posted about denying the fact that people's loved ones died in the respective atrocities.
It seems more insensitive, than hateful, on the face of it.
Originally posted by Astyanax
It is a slight upon every other race, and is therefore inherently hateful. Did you think inter-ethnic relations are some kind of rah-rah football
match?
No, it's not inherently hateful, nor is it necessary a slight on every other race.
Again, we're not privy to the emotions of someone when they post anything. Interpretation of text can vary between people that read it.
What if, hypothetically, one ethnic group was , on average, superior in certain departments to others ?
Should we suppress the ''truth'', all in the name of ''inter-ethnic'' relations ?
Is that not intellectually dishonest ?
I'm assuming that white people, on average, are superior to Congolese pygmies at the High Jump.
Are you seriously saying that my above observation is inherently hateful towards Congolese pygmies ?
Or was it an emotionless observation of the truth on that particular matter ?
Originally posted by Astyanax
The first is not; it is an opinion. The second is a lie, everybody knows it is a lie, and therefore repeating it is merely a provocation. Nobody would
do it unless they were (1) filled with hatred for homosexuals, (2) mad or (3) really, really stupid and ignorant.
Once again, it's
you that appears to be letting your emotions cloud rational judgement of this issue, with your pre-conceived notions on the
emotional motivations that someone would have, to post a certain comment.
It's not a lie. It's only your opinion that it is.
Abnormal is defined as ''deviating from the normal or average'', which appears to be applicable to minority sexualities.
Deviant is defined as ''deviating especially from an accepted norm''. So it rather depends on the individual's take on whether homosexuality is
an ''accepted norm'' or not.
Neither of those two comments are ''a lie'', and neither are inherently ''hateful''.
We do not know what emotion would be behind a poster saying these things.
It may be hate; then again, it may not.
Originally posted by Astyanax
Hatred is often indistinguishable from stupidity and ignorance.
I agree, it sometimes is. So, why would someone automatically and illogically conclude that someone's post is down to ''hate'', rather than any
other possibilities, including stupidity or ignorance ?
It's irrational to guess what someone's motivation or emotional state behind posting is.
We do not know whether someone's opinion is motivated by hate, unless they explicitly inform us of this fact !
[edit on 17-8-2010 by Sherlock Holmes]