Jump to content

Mercer

Recommended Posts

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.

Politicians make the rules, then out of desperation (He's going to lose) throws shade at the people who have to follow said rules, just so he can squeeze a few more votes from the economically illiterate masses who have no clue WTF is really going on. These same mouth breathers that fall for this "Amazon does not pay taxes" bullshit would shit their pants if they had to go back to waiting in line at Walmart. 

 

image.thumb.png.943d4458f3e92b8eb7d971aa5865d185.png

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Kults said:

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/22/2020 at 1:20 PM, Mercer said:

I honestly think you should be able to refuse to bake a gay wedding cake. Not that I don't think those people would be total shit bags, and I could never associate with that type of hate trash, even if they don't think they're being hateful themselves.

 

The problem is, in that specific type of situation the government having that much say in a mutually agreed (or un-agreed upon) transaction would cause more harm than good big picture. Someone could walk into a muslim owned bakery and request an image of Mohamed on a cake. Producing the image itself is forbidden by their belief so it's not the same thing, but you see where I'm going with this. Ultimately, a business owner should have the right to refuse doing something they think is immoral, just as much as a consumer should have the right to refuse patronage.  

It's definitely a wicked problem as one solution just throws up new problems, either way you go.

 

I don't like the idea of a church being forced to marry a gay couple (worth noting though, I've seen many priests say that nowhere in the bible does it say being a homo is a sin), as people should not be forced to act against their beliefs.

 

However, where does it stand when Macy's or Bergstroms decides that they won't allow black people or Latinos in their shops because they feel there is a high chance that they will shoplift? What about when a chain of Texan steakhouses refuse to serve anyone with a JEwish sounding name or schools won't allow Asian looking kids enrol because they might have the rona?

 

Again, I understand that forcing people to not discriminate raises its own problems as well, such as fatties suing strip clubs and Muslim bakeries being forced to draw pics of Mohammad. But I think those situations are so small and trivial compared to the social instability that outright racism, etc. can cause when society is allowed to be divided like that.

 

The mask situation is a little different as it's based on behaviour rather than identity or core beliefs (such as religion, identity, etc.). Just like you can knock back a drunk from a bar or a naked person from public transport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/21/2020 at 4:43 AM, Mercer said:


This is more of an endorsement of anti government make the rules for everything sentiment than anything else.  I mean if we’re forced to listen to anyone on this issue should t we just consult our own doctors individually?
 

Just because one of these politically appointed officials (who’s motives are only political in nature) have one opinion, why is that the be all end all? They get these appointments because elected officials return favors for political clout, not because there’s some sort of competence test they outscored all others on. Likewise their employees that advise them, are fucking losers who couldn’t make it in the private sector. They know which way they should lean on every issue, government decides everything. Those that can’t fall in line with the message, endorsing more power for the political class  Won’t get that cushy promotion. That’s how it works.

 

Meanwhile, a brainwashed and sheepish public is convinced anyone thinking for themselves is the problem. People like me out here working in public safety, actually saving lives through their work, who take every precaution possible to stop the spread are immediately labeled conspiracy theorist if we even dare to question the state. Stats that clearly prove our points are dismissed “we don’t know for sure yet” but the official narrative must never be questioned even though we “don’t know for sure yet”.

 

It’s not just the Covid thing, this completely irrational devotion to main stream narrative is almost universal now. even slight variation from the official narrative will automatically have you labeled as a racist, sexist, conspiracy theorist, or just someone who is generally selfish and doesn’t care about other people. it’s ridiculous to anybody who’s ever read a history book, the main stream has never once in history had everything correct and if we look back the political views of just one generation ago look so obviously flawed, how can we assume the main stream narrative of today is any different then the rest of world history. I mean realistically what are the chances that in 2070 will be able to look back and say hey these people had everything right, I can’t believe people questioned the main stream narrative.

This seems more like a self-congratulatory rant than a considered position.

 

You've conflated expert opinion with mainstream positions and/or the official position, which is obviously erroneous.

 

As an illustration of this, much of the time, in history, it is the experts who are going against the common sense or mainstream position.

 

Honestly, this post is just a bunch of bias that I'm not sure how to respond to as you have a strong opinion on how the bureaucracy works without having any actual exposure to it at the levels you refer to and you want use stats based on partial data. I'm not sure your position is credible.

 

My point is that expertise has its place. Of course, we should all, always use critical thinking and question all points. But if I'm going to make some decisions on asset safety (or whatever it is you do), I'm coming to some one like you to ask questions and get opinions. I might seek another expert for a second opinion and then make an informed and considered decision (did those guys know their shit, where they just trying to make a buck, what is their reputation like, are there any reviews, etc. etc.), but it will still be my decision. The same will be for medical, engineering, legal, etc. etc. I'm sure as fuck not going to take the word of some one whose read a couple of books and blog posts and decides that they have all the answers.

 

Expertise is a starting point and sometimes you just gotta take some one's word for it. I sure as fuck don't want you up in the cockpit of the 747 telling the pilot what he's doing wrong because you read a book and played around on a mate's simulator.

 

.

Edited by Hua Guofang
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...