No. Unless I have completely lost the ability to read and comprehend English sentences pf average cpmplexity, he’s being Pitted for being Johnny One-Note and repeating the exact same opinion for nine years running, while not acknowledging that the dozens of people disagreeing with him over the years might possibly be making points on why his ‘solution’ is impractical.
Said to Marley-the-human-being (because it’s necessary to distinguish here): The fact that You didn’t get this illuminates for me why he has had license to do so whenever the topic comes up. There is an inference to be drawn here, but here and by me.(FWIW, I’m honestly trying to speak my mind here without unduly brinking the board rules; if I’ve gone too far, please take that intent into consideration.)
Understood, and my apologies. As I noted, I was trying to say something easily construed as criticism of moderation without actively breaking that rule, since it was relevant to stpauler’s OP complaint. I shall refrain from any further criticism of moderation of this board.
“He says the same ignorant shit all the time while pretending it doesn’t get debunked, but he only does it once a year” isn’t much of a defense. And I doubt stpauler posted all the examples.
If only. I just used the once a year to demonstrate the repetition of his position. There were more occurrences of the same point of view. Oddly, I knew that he had repeated this position over and over and when I started compiling, I wondered if I would be able to find at least one from each year. My worries were quickly assuaged however.
Magellan01 hasn’t been censored from repeating his point of view against gay marriage at all. He can have his stupid opinion, he just didn’t get to have it (and repeat it ad nauseum) without criticism.
I think the OP is seriously whack. I joined in 08, and quickly put magellan01 on my ignore list, where he has been ever since. And it wasn’t over gay marriage. The only people who should have to read magellan01 are moderators.
Sadly, I have submitted to an oath that I will never put anyone on this message board on ignore because that would be violating the fundamental purpose of this board, fighting ignorance. You see, putting a poster on ignore is ignorance and this site has been trying to fight that since 1973.
Actually, the consistency of magellan’s argument (“gays be fine, but I think it should have a different word because I prefer using ‘marriage’ to mean a specific form of heterosexual relationship”) almost makes me take his claims not to dislike gays seriously.
If you’re lagging behind the Mormon church on this, that’s pretty pathetic. You’ve lost this one, magellan01. Throw in the towel. Gay marriage isn’t the law of the land, but it’s coming and can’t be stopped at this point. Civil rights take another step forward.
The last part of this is false. I am fully aware that there are valid points on the other side of the debate and have acknowledged that repeatedly. They simply do not persuade me that it is worth abandoning my position. If they did, I would. Seems pretty obvious, no?
Aside from that what is wrong with holding a position for nine years? This is ridiculous. If you were to debate, say, faith, on a board that was predominantly atheist, would you feel the need to alter your opinion? If so, when? Year 3? 4? 7? The notion that I have an obligation to change my opinion either due to time or it being a minority opinion—or (shudder) both—is repulsive. And painfully stupid.
Perhaps you can explain yourself here. It seems that you think that because I participate in most of these threads when they come up and state and defend my position, that you think that that is a problem that the moderators should deal with? I could be wrong here, but it appears that you think my behavior is somehow trollish? Is that right. And due to that, that I should not be allowed to post. Correct?
I’ll wait for you’re response so I’m sure to address your actual positions.
Even if that is correct, why do you think I should be obligated to either change my opinion or not voice it?
If abortion were to become illegal, are people no longer allowed to argue that a woman has a right to control her own body? Or if it is legal during the entire pregnancy, is no one allowed to argue for the rights of the unborn and against abortions performed in the ninth month?
