Please, I had to pick myself up off the floor.
To say that there are exceptions to a rule does not mean that there is no rule.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Bash Fuji Thread
- Thread starter havingfun
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
To say that there are exceptions to a rule does not mean that there is no rule.
It's been my point from the outset that sexual relationships are inherently too complex to regulate.
Who is talking about regulating relationships?
You make a social contract with your wife not to screw anyone else, you break it and are here trying to prove that you're not a cheating sexual predator.
You're just trying to somehow make an argument that breaking this agreement with your wife is moral.
Now that's entertainment.
Hmm, Family Court basically does that every day it is in session, although it is retroactive rather than proactive.
No, Family Court does not do that, and absolutely stays the hell away from that topic. Family court restricts itself to dividing property, ensuring support, and looking out for the rights of the children.
So for example Family Court explicitly passes no judgement whatsoever on the rightness or wrongness of infidelity, merely recognizing it, like a one year separation, as evidence that a relationship has ended.
Please, I had to pick myself up off the floor.
To say that there are exceptions to a rule does not mean that there is no rule.
To say that there are exceptions to a rule certainly does mean, however that the rule is not universal.
Fuji is apparently unaware of whole species having gone extinct (eg: dinosaurs), of varieties within species having fared poorly in the struggle for survival (eg: white moths in industrializing England), or of the phenomenon of palyamorous inbreeding leading to infertility, and a host of other biological facts.
I have no idea whatsoever what would prompt you to bring up such irrelevant things. We were talking about infidelity in modern human societies. I note that, quite the opposite of polyamourous inbreeding, that infidelity increases genetic diversity by enabling individuals to mix their DNA with a larger number of partners.
If this board had standards Fuji would get banned just by being the biggest idiot.
The only one around here likely to be banned is you. I'll note for the benefit of any moderators reading that you repeatedly and unabashedly violate the rules on this board. I respond to your points rationally, pointing out the misrepresentations you commit, and the errors that you make, or sometimes--rarely--responding to the occasional good point you make that moves the debate forward.
But for the most part your posts are filled with school yard insults and personal attacks, in direct violation of the rules of this board.
Who is talking about regulating relationships?
You make a social contract with your wife not to screw anyone else, you break it and are here trying to prove that you're not a cheating sexual predator.
You're just trying to somehow make an argument that breaking this agreement with your wife is moral.
Now that's entertainment.
The notion that a marriage is subject to contract law in the manner you imagine is from a bygone era, enlightened people, and enlightened courts, do not see things that way.
And why would one ever think a moral code or social convention was not the kind of thing flexible enough to articulate what is proper, what is not, when the rule can be broken and when not, and what to do about breaking the rule and what not?
I've stated the reason before: Sexual relationships are so complex that human language cannot properly describe them, let alone be used to formulate moral prescriptions that would apply in any reasonable manner.
I'm getting bored of you mumbling "naturalistic fallacy" without your actually comprehending what you are talking about. I've replied to that multiple times and you haven't once demonstrated that you have the intellectual capacity to comprehend what is being said to you. As such it's hilarious that you think you can "refute" something you haven't even demonstrated that you understand.
The claim is that it's wrong to prescribe against something that is normal, healthy human behavior. That is an ASSUMPTION. It's not a point that I'm trying to prove. You can disagree with that assumption, which puts you into the "we love death more than you love life" camp of theologians, in the good company of Osama bin Laden, and his ilk. Certainly it's a logically consistent position.
I've made it clear that is an assumption. You CAN disagree with it. As I said--I choose life.
Once you've accepted that assumption then we just need to look for evidence that a behavior is natural, healthy human behavior and at that point we can apply the assumption--no naturalistic fallacy.
It would be nice to see from you some evidence that you've rubbed your two neurons together and managed to comprehend the point, first, before you make another pathetic, failed attempt to refute something you don't even understand.
What is it like Fuji knowing everything about everything?No, Family Court does not do that.
And I will note that Sw1tch has posted some of the most intelligent psychological commentary I have read on any board.I'll note for the benefit of any moderators reading that you repeatedly and unabashedly violate the rules on this board.
Ask yourself. Does Fuji believe he is above everything? That his behavior is above all censure? That we are all stupid? Does it seem accurate to say his argumentative strategy involves redirect upon redirect, one new irrelevancy after the other? Does it seem he lives to direct his own circus? That lying and deceit are central to his life, not just occasionally present?
I would be happy to get banned from Terb for recommending that an evident psychopath get banned and for being sensible enough to flat deny his psychopathic babble.
He could just have a very disturbing fantasy life, or he could be just trolling around causing shit by pretending to be a nutbar. He is obviously lying, the only question is how much of what he says is part of his ideal fantasy life and how much of it is trying to get everyone's goat by trying to sound like a psychotic retard.
I do find it interesting that he is now in effect claiming that not only does he constantly cheat on his "hot wife" but also that he tried to get as many of these girls knocked up as possible. Otherwise his evolutionary argument makes no sense. Not that not making sense would be out of character.
What is it like Fuji knowing everything about everything?
I'm right. Family court does not intrude into sexual relationships. It deals with the fallout from them, perhaps, but it doesn't regular or proscribe any particular sexual behavior.
And I will note that Sw1tch has posted some of the most intelligent psychological commentary I have read on any board.
You think calling other people "psychopaths" just because you don't agree with their moral outlook is "intelligent"? I think you've said more about yourself here than anything else.
Really???
I see that you actually have nothing more to contribute. You've lost the debate:
You're unable to make further points without misrepresenting my position, and when challenged to do so you launched into a personal attack. Note, not a post in which you had some credible debating point mixed in with some off words, the entire substance of your post amounted to an ad hominem.
You don't like that I cheat, you don't like that I champion sexual hypocrisy, and it bugs you SO MUCH that you have to resort to name calling. You really are a narrow minded Victorian.
You lose.
I see that you actually have nothing more to contribute. You've lost the debate:
You're unable to make further points without misrepresenting my position, and when challenged to do so you launched into a personal attack. Note, not a post in which you had some credible debating point mixed in with some off words, the entire substance of your post amounted to an ad hominem.
You don't like that I cheat, you don't like that I champion sexual hypocrisy, and it bugs you SO MUCH that you have to resort to name calling. You really are a narrow minded Victorian.
You lose.
you are a big mean meanie.
See my post here - Fuji has had a change of address
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?344809-I-have-a-big-pimple-on-my-butt/page2
i see what you are trying to do, you sare tying to say fuji is a pimple on that guys butt. quite witty and humourous.
Sw1itch you have pointed out fallacies in misrepresentations of my views, it's not even in evidence that you actually intellectually grasp the points I made.
I had pointed that out to you several times but you go on pretending that you've said something intelligent.
Mostly though you relied on weak minded childish ad hominem.
You're a joke.
I had pointed that out to you several times but you go on pretending that you've said something intelligent.
Mostly though you relied on weak minded childish ad hominem.
You're a joke.
Thank you for acknowledging the point.Family court . . . . .deals with the fallout from [sexual relationships].
I believe that someone with the professional training to see what they see, pointing it out to the rest of us is just plain honest.You think calling other people psychopaths. . .
Now that said, several posters have mentioned that this may not be "you" merely the persona you choose to present to TERB . . . .
The first thing about changing is wanting to change.
i see what you are trying to do, you sare tying to say fuji is a pimple on that guys butt. quite witty and humourous.
Lets suppose that Fuji is both African Ameican and a lover of the tube steak.
As a pimple that would make him a Blackhead.
Wow, this logic stuff is easy.
.
I believe that someone with the professional training to see what they see, pointing it out to the rest of us is just plain honest.
Now that said, several posters have mentioned that this may not be "you" merely the persona you choose to present to TERB . . . .
The first thing about changing is wanting to change.
dude everyone here knows he is a pussy whipped hasbeen and has no say in his life at home and the wife calls the shots. he is most likely the manager at the local mcdonalds. he created a life for himself that everyone is supposed to buy into where he is allowed to talk and express himself. so please don't take his only joy and freedom away.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
