dyslexda's recent activity

  1. Comment on It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake: LGBT+ discrimination in ~talk

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    I didn't say all forms of morality are equal. I said that the source of morality does not intrinsically affect its validity.

    I didn't say all forms of morality are equal. I said that the source of morality does not intrinsically affect its validity.

    1 vote

  2. Comment on It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake: LGBT+ discrimination in ~talk

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    The status quo is that everybody has equal access to rights (all men can marry women), but nobody has access to all rights (you can't marry children). Gay marriage is extending rights (men can now...

    the default is having all rights, and the person claiming that rights should be limited has the burden of ethical proof.

    The status quo is that everybody has equal access to rights (all men can marry women), but nobody has access to all rights (you can't marry children). Gay marriage is extending rights (men can now marry men). Under the burden of proof analogy, it'd be up to you to provide that rationale. However, it's all irrelevant; systems of morality aren't based on objective fact like scientific discovery. You can come up with reasons to justify your view just as the baker can justify his, and yours is not objectively better.

    So it's not about me hypocritically imposing my will.

    You're still seeking to impose your moral will, which is what you condemned the baker for. You can justify your will, as can the baker. If the baker is an asshole for "imposing" his will (and I disagree with that characterization), you're just as much an asshole for imposing your will by demanding he serve gays.

    The point I'm getting at is that I don't draw a difference between sources of morality. Derive yours from religion? Fine. Derive yours from something else? Fine. They're all the same, and it is not inherently "better" to impose your will just because it isn't derived from religion.

    1 vote

  3. Comment on It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake: LGBT+ discrimination in ~talk

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    Well, I don't think it's implied; pretty sure he explicitly said that. Not being part of a system of morality doesn't suddenly make you immune to people wanting you to follow theirs. Were...

    His lack of participation implies he thinks that the marriage is wrong.

    Well, I don't think it's implied; pretty sure he explicitly said that.

    Why should it be if they aren't members of his religion

    Not being part of a system of morality doesn't suddenly make you immune to people wanting you to follow theirs. Were northerners wrong for imposing their belief that slavery was wrong on the southerners, despite southerners not sharing their system of morality? Or to flip it around: The baker obviously does not share the same system of morality that you do. Why should it be wrong for him to believe what he does?

    If that's what he believes then make them their cake and let God judge them later.

    Easy for you to say, as you don't have the same religious compulsions. Let's teleport you back to the antebellum South: would you happily serve a cruel slave owner, believing it's up to God to judge him later? Or would you protest what you saw as an immoral, yet legal, practice?

    Regarding marriage, I simply believe in equal rights.

    Gays have equal rights. Nobody is stopping them from marrying women just like heterosexuals. And before you counter with the "rich are forbidden from sleeping under bridges just like the poor," I'd ask, do you believe everyone should be able to marry anyone they wish? I'd be willing to bet you'd happily endorse limiting people marrying without consent, marrying children, animals, etc. I'm not saying I disagree with those limits, merely that you have them. The baker simply has slightly more limits.

    That's an inclusive belief instead of an exclusive belief, though, and many other laws are already based on it.

    Doesn't matter. You're still looking to impose your own system of morality on this man. Further, the law is not an objective arbiter of what is moral or not,; you shouldn't use it now any more than you could use "Gay marriage is illegal" as an argument against its morality ten years ago.

    2 votes

  4. Comment on It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake: LGBT+ discrimination in ~talk

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    Using reddit as an example, that's a strategy that has led to many subreddits going downhill overtime, with the easy example being memes and other low-effort content. On one hand, users can argue,...

    you know the remedy for when something doesn't interest you? Clicking something else.

    Using reddit as an example, that's a strategy that has led to many subreddits going downhill overtime, with the easy example being memes and other low-effort content. On one hand, users can argue, as you have, that readers simply can choose to not click the offending content. On the other hand, readers can argue, as tyil has, that uninteresting or unrelated content effectively squeezes out other content.

    Take /r/DnD as a specific example. Their front page currently has 19 of 50 links as "Art" of some kind; 11 of the top 20 (and this isn't counting all the "OC" flair that is questionably labeled, and should really just be "Art"). The subreddit as a whole has a lot of this low-effort, show-off content, and sifting through it all for more in-depth becomes a chore. Thus, you get a host of related but more tailored subreddits, like /r/DnDBehindTheScreen, /r/DnDIY, /r/DMAcademy, /r/DnDNext, etc, while the original turns into nothing but those original low-effort posts, because users tune it out.

    tyil is trying to convey that he's worried topics like this will lead to people tuning out of ~talk if they see too much general stuff that should possibly be slotted to a more specific audience.

    Of course, at this point I'm not sure why I bothered getting involved; it's obvious you're agitated, and my commenting will probably only agitate you further. I apologize for that.

    6 votes

  5. Comment on It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake: LGBT+ discrimination in ~talk

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    Because you (quite obviously) do not share his religious beliefs. His beliefs are not inherently "wrong" just because you disagree with them, and adhering to those beliefs does not make him an...

    Refusing to design a cake for a gay couple seems like a dick move, to me.

    Because you (quite obviously) do not share his religious beliefs. His beliefs are not inherently "wrong" just because you disagree with them, and adhering to those beliefs does not make him an asshole.

    Believing that everyone should subscribe to your particular religion's moral system is entitled and narcissistic.

    Two points: One, the baker didn't demand they alter their behavior. He isn't asking them to subscribe to his religion's system of morals. His lack of participation in something he finds immoral does not compel anyone to participate in his own moral system.

    Two, aren't you saying that everyone should subscribe to your moral system?

    4 votes

  6. Comment on It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake: LGBT+ discrimination in ~talk

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    Are meta discussions not allowed? You're being pretty dismissive of the other user's complaints. I'm not making a judgement on whether or not this belongs in the current group; however, that...

    Are meta discussions not allowed? You're being pretty dismissive of the other user's complaints. I'm not making a judgement on whether or not this belongs in the current group; however, that discussion is a valid one to have.

    3 votes

  7. Comment on It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake: LGBT+ discrimination in ~talk

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    Not believing in gay marriage does not automatically make you an asshole. In fact, the baker seems to have been very courteous throughout the whole process.

    Not believing in gay marriage does not automatically make you an asshole. In fact, the baker seems to have been very courteous throughout the whole process.

    3 votes

  8. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    Yes, I'm aware of Le Pen, and the rise of other nationalist movements like AfD. I'm not surprised that Le Pen was framed in the context of Trump, much like Trump was framed in the context of the...

    Yes, I'm aware of Le Pen, and the rise of other nationalist movements like AfD. I'm not surprised that Le Pen was framed in the context of Trump, much like Trump was framed in the context of the Brexit vote as a general acknowledgement of nationalistic and populist movements worldwide. Occasionally prominent foreign leaders do make it into the US discourse (the obvious current example being Putin), just like I'd expect the US President to occasionally make it into European political discourse.

    However, I'm referring to comparisons to a political spectrum. How often does a French policy get discussed in the context of US policy? Do the Tories reference the US right when defunding the NHS? Did Ireland bring up the US left when it voted to allow abortion? How often was US immigration policy and strategy brought into the migrant debate in Sweden?

    Once again: I'm not saying that Western Europe is irrelevant. I'm not even saying we shouldn't consider what they do politically. All I'm saying is that calibrating your "Left vs Right" scale on European politics is pointless when explicitly discussing US internal politics.

  9. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    I'll reference /r/NeutralPolitics again. They don't enforce truly neutral viewpoints; they enforce a neutral community, one that isn't inherently supportive or antagonistic of one side of the...

    I'll reference /r/NeutralPolitics again. They don't enforce truly neutral viewpoints; they enforce a neutral community, one that isn't inherently supportive or antagonistic of one side of the ideological spectrum.

  10. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    Something something, "you first?" See, we actually moved into a more interesting topic, the philosophy of terminating conversation threads. But hey, I'll just go ahead and sign off with what I...

    Something something, "you first?"

    See, we actually moved into a more interesting topic, the philosophy of terminating conversation threads. But hey, I'll just go ahead and sign off with what I first did many posts ago: Have a nice day.

  11. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    I'll admit I'm probably close to that line, but your behavior isn't exemplary either. It's less "trolling" and more "see how silly this sounds when someone tosses it back at you?"

    I'll admit I'm probably close to that line, but your behavior isn't exemplary either. It's less "trolling" and more "see how silly this sounds when someone tosses it back at you?"

  12. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    I'm declaring that we're at an impasse, that your perspective is pretty much incompatible with mine. That's not an insult, that's not an attack. That's saying I've grown weary of the discussion...

    I'm declaring that we're at an impasse, that your perspective is pretty much incompatible with mine. That's not an insult, that's not an attack. That's saying I've grown weary of the discussion and I'm done with it. If you're hoping to always have perfect agreement in all comment chains before they're allowed to be terminated, Deimos is gonna have to invest in a lot more server storage.

  13. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    Oh, and for what it's worth, this comment is toxic. Please read the docs to better understand the kind of discourse expected on tildes.

    Oh, and for what it's worth, this comment is toxic. Please read the docs to better understand the kind of discourse expected on tildes.

  14. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    Literally that's been my perspective from the very first comment: consider US politics from a US perspective. Not that radical.

    you're only interested in looking at the political compass in a strictly US-centric fashion.

    Literally that's been my perspective from the very first comment: consider US politics from a US perspective. Not that radical.

  15. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    Feel free to. All I asked you for were some sources, and you're unwilling to provide them. You're right, it's starting to feel a lot like echo chambers on reddit.

    Feel free to. All I asked you for were some sources, and you're unwilling to provide them. You're right, it's starting to feel a lot like echo chambers on reddit.

  16. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    I do not think the rest of the world is irrelevant. I never said I don't care about other countries. I am, to use the dreaded term, more of a "globalist" than not. However, I think the political...

    I do not think the rest of the world is irrelevant. I never said I don't care about other countries. I am, to use the dreaded term, more of a "globalist" than not. However, I think the political spectrum by which Western Europe orients itself is irrelevant when discussing US politics. Think of it the other way around: how often do politicians in Belgium have to frame their own ideologies in terms of American politics? Something tells me they wouldn't give a damn what Louisiana voters would think about their policies.

  17. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    In complete fairness, I was trying to shut down discussion. I was done. That's what my "Have a nice day" sign-off meant. Or do I have an obligation to continue? Does the structure of Tildes coerce...

    In complete fairness, I was trying to shut down discussion. I was done. That's what my "Have a nice day" sign-off meant. Or do I have an obligation to continue? Does the structure of Tildes coerce users into continuing conversation until both parties happily come to an agreement?

    You said my one comment was "all [you] need to know", and painted me as having a fundamentally warped view of reality:

    Yes, and I already explained this: from my perspective, your view is warped. From your perspective, my view is warped. It's all relative. I'm not saying one view is inherently better or worse, I'm saying we're not even starting from the same a priori assumptions, which makes any kind of agreement very difficult. Hence my attempted sign-off.

    Trying to attack my contributions now is just more of the same.

    You attacked mine first.

    you're preventing the conversation from progressing by insisting the foundation of my argument is irrelevant. This isn't a foregone conclusion.

    Literally my whole argument is that /r/politics is left leaning from the lens of American politics, which is the only lens that matters, considering it only concerns itself with American politics. There is little you can do to reshape that view, any more than I could convince you that voters in Amsterdam should be worried what residents of Arkansas should think about their politics.

    let the conversation go on without you.

    That's what I was attempting to do. You're free to stop replying at any time.

    1 vote

  18. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    I think it's pretty disingenuous to define your political spectrum based upon Western European politics, and then claim it's the universal lens through which all world politics should be seen.

    I think it's pretty disingenuous to define your political spectrum based upon Western European politics, and then claim it's the universal lens through which all world politics should be seen.

  19. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    I think you mean "Western European political terminology." You'll have to cite some real sources if you want to claim that your definitions are universal in nature, applying throughout Africa,...

    Universal political terminology

    I think you mean "Western European political terminology." You'll have to cite some real sources if you want to claim that your definitions are universal in nature, applying throughout Africa, Asia, the Americas, and Europe.

  20. Comment on will we see a ~politics? in ~tildes

    dyslexda
    Link Parent
    I've shared my argument in other posts plenty of times. I saw no reason to merely repeat myself, especially when tvfj started to repeat himself. The discussion was done at that point. Or maybe you...

    I've shared my argument in other posts plenty of times. I saw no reason to merely repeat myself, especially when tvfj started to repeat himself. The discussion was done at that point.

    Or maybe you could bring something constructive to the table, instead of openly implying I'm closed minded?