O im sry did I break yer feelings? #aspergersmademedoit
Some religious people object to the existence of gays as full persons deserving of regular ‘human-rights’ like marriage because being gay is ‘not natural’. I wonder if they even realize what natural means in the real world. If we were to live in nature, ‘nature’ wouldn’t care whether not there were gay individuals unless it effected the survival of DNA. Maybe gay humans would not be selected for, and would die out. But if that was the case, why is the ‘gay gene’ still popping up in predictable percentages today? Maybe for the same reason that it pops up in dozens of other species.
But of course that’s not what they mean. They obviously refer to the antiquated essentialist idea of ‘the natural order of things’ when they refer to something being natural or unnatural.
So-called new-age ‘relativistic’ parenting in which parents make no value judgements on their child’s future education and career choice, boyfriend or girlfriend, and praises them not for accomplishment but for ‘effort’ and mediocrity etc is the worst insult of an upbringing you can give to a child. A ‘friend of mine’ was raised like this, and told me so.
Why on earth is that that i’m unable to voluntarily proposition someone to perform dangerous surgery on me in order to make me into a cyborg? Oh yeah that’s right, because the useless, meddling giant overlord government will send thugs to arrest me and the other party.
Why is it that ‘baby murder’ is considered the vilest of crimes, even by those of us who dismiss abortion as a victimless crime, because fetuses lack sentience? If you hold to the opinion that fetuses lack sentience, then how exactly do you reason that newborn infants are in fact suddenly sentient? If you contend that fetuses at some stage in development become sentient, then you must be willing to also call late-term abortions murder. Otherwise there’s few reasonable grounds to choose the arbitrary status of ‘born’ as a marker of the beginning of personhood and therefore the right to life.
Further, some support the right to abort severely mentally or physically handicapped late-term fetuses. Why then do they not extend that right to include the right to kill severely mentally or physically handicapped newborns?
Having a wide network of friends who give realistic feedback is one of the last things you ever want.
For example, say you’re some stranger I’m talking to online. if you’re one of the only person I talk to and I put a heavy relative weight on your opinion, you would basically be able to convince me that I’m stupid by simply saying so and providing some examples. But given that I have a fairly wide range of feeback, and the general concencus for most of my life has been that I am rather clever, it’s unlikely you would be able to exercise such a control over my self esteem in regard to my intelligence.
That’s why it’s told to people by therapists that having a social network is helpful for happiness…it widens onesconcensus sample and biases it with people who have an agenda to bring up your self-worth. It’s brilliant really.
Much of our life in society seems to centre around democratically-actualized rights and customs. This is because abstract concepts like rights or customs require either brute force or general acceptance (respectively) in society, to be actualized. Saying something like ‘I don’t care if everyone does that, they’re wrong, gets you about as far as does saying ‘gays ought to have freedom in Muslim countries’ so long as you don’t have either brute force to uphold such rights or general or some localized social acceptance to uphold the alternate custom you advocate.
That’s why it actually does matter that for example most guys pay on dates, whether or not you think it ought to be that way. It matters because whether you like it or not, you won’t be able to actually find a chick who will accept your cheapness.