3 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Steve QJ's avatar

"The UN Human Rights charter does not favor one over the other."

Wait, aren't you the one who's always ridiculing organisations like the UN and the ICC? And here you are using them as an authority? Can you please make up your mind where you stand on literally any topic?

Anyway, I'm sorry man, I can't keep correcting your glaring and basic failures of knowledge on things like this. It's exhausting. You don't understand this conflict at all, even simple, uncontested historical facts about it, because almost everything you think you know is Israeli propaganda. And when I point this out to you, you just move on to the next thing without ever seriously engaging with it.

So all of your arguments, while they might seem reasonable to you, are built on completely incorrect foundations.

I invite you, as I've invited you several times, to actually read what the UN, for example, has to say about this. But I suspect you won't.

Expand full comment
Rogue4Gay's avatar

Its interesting how you debate.

You broadly claim I'm incorrect, claim you're exhausted, claim contradictions, but do not include any facts.

I include many facts but you don't counter any of them.

What the UN has to claim about "this". What is "this"?

I have read the UN human rights charter. I know exactly what it says. It protects individual rights in your classic view of rights at the same time it protects the right to religion of the individual and in community. Many religious positions are at odds with the individual rights? Who is right.

I close with the quote from JC Superstar I have left you with before.

But what is truth? Is truth unchanging law?

We both have truths - are mine the same as yours?

This quote encapsulates the human condition.

Expand full comment
Steve QJ's avatar

"Its interesting how you debate."

It's interesting that you can only parse this feedback, that I and several others have given you over the years, as a "debate" tactic.

You've read hundreds of my conversations. Is this a "debate tactic" you've seen me use with other people? No. I say things like this to you, and again, I'm not the only one, because you are one of the most consistent and belligerent examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect that I have ever seen.

To be extremely clear, we don't both have "truths." We both have OPINIONS. And yes, opinions can be more or less correct. They can also be totally incorrect because they're based on nonsense or gut feelings that have never been tested against facts or evidence.

That's why you say obviously incorrect things about a range of topics with absolute and totally unearned confidence, you appear to take nothing onboard when you're corrected, and often, though thankfully not in this case, do so in the most arrogant and combative tone possible.

It is, therefore, IMPOSSIBLE to have a "debate" with you, because you don't know enough, and I'm not interested in wasting hours of my time digging up facts and evidence to fill in the gaps in your knowledge. Why on Earth would I do that over and over again for a guy on the internet who has proven himself unwilling to learn? That's why I end up deciding to stop wasting my time.

Things MIGHT be a little better if you approached them as simple conversations instead of "debates." If you had the good sense to recognise when you're not particularly well-informed about a topic and approached conversations with a little humility. You might even learn something. But I've already suggested that several times, and it also seems to be beyond you.

Expand full comment