Gay bars: Discriminatory?

[The Steel Magnolia]

How? There's nothing to suggest that anti-discrimination laws have backfired. On the contrary, they seem to be working well. It's clear that the situation is Denmark is better than in most of the world. The situation is still not good enough, however - there's still work to be done.

Except in one of the supposedly meccas of gay rights, there's a lot of discrimination. Making it illegal to hate gays only makes the people that hate gays hate them more. People should have an open dialogue instead of promoting politically correct nonsense.

Sauuuuce.

[Premislyd]

Except in one of the supposedly meccas of gay rights, there's a lot of discrimination. Making it illegal to hate gays only makes the people that hate gays hate them more. People should have an open dialogue instead of promoting politically correct nonsense.

Sauuuuce.

Pretty ironic that you're asking him to source yet you won't even source your stuff.

[Ascelonia]

No, but it'd make it a heck of a lot harder for me to be out.

also lawl at your ignorance of history.

The reign of terror would totally have evaporated on its own. those abolitionists should have left alone too.

Except your view of history is so skewed and deficient, I wouldn't be surprised if you just lapped up what your 7th grade history teacher told you and didn't bother with looking anything up on your own. Abolitionists were pretty violent in implementing their policies. There's a lot of violence during and prior to the Civil War. They had no intention of reducing this violence. Of course people would be upset and looking for blood if they had their property and livelihoods destroyed.

[Ascelonia]

Sauuuuce.

Did you even read the thread? Are you blind?

[Gravlen]

Yes, and? Your point is...?

My point is that I can pull numbers out of my ass just like you.

Though you obviously cannot use them to make an argument. Try again.

[Olthar]

Sauuuuce.

Did you even read the thread? Are you blind?

That only works if reading the thread will answer the question. I have read every post of this thread, and I do not recall any source for your claims being previously posted.

[Premislyd]

My point is that I can pull numbers out of my ass just like you.

Though you obviously cannot use them to make an argument. Try again.

Witty comment instead of an actual argument. Try again.

[Gravlen]

How? There's nothing to suggest that anti-discrimination laws have backfired. On the contrary, they seem to be working well. It's clear that the situation is Denmark is better than in most of the world. The situation is still not good enough, however - there's still work to be done.

Except in one of the supposedly meccas of gay rights, there's a lot of discrimination. Making it illegal to hate gays only makes the people that hate gays hate them more.

Absolutely nothing supports this assertion.

People should have an open dialogue instead of promoting politically correct nonsense.

There is an open dialogue. What's the "politically correct nonsense" you speak of?

[Condunum]

Though you obviously cannot use them to make an argument. Try again.

Witty comment instead of an actual argument. Try again.

Jesus fuck do you guys both want to just jerk off in front of each other, or actually debate?

[Gravlen]

Though you obviously cannot use them to make an argument. Try again.

Witty comment instead of an actual argument. Try again.

Wrong. My argument was made, and it still stands:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_rights_in_Denmark
" Denmark provides one of the highest degrees of liberty in the world for its LGBT community."

It's probably safe to say homophobia in Denmark is a rare occurrence.

Not really:

30% of 13-16 y.o. don't think it's OK to be gay. Hate crimes happen more often than expected.

For nylig kunne man læse i en ny undersøgelse, at godt 30 pct. af de 13-16-årige ikke synes, at det er o.k. at være homoseksuel.

Og for en måneds tid siden offentliggjorde PET deres første årlige rapport om hadforbrydelser opgjort med en ny og mere fintmasket opgørelsesmetode. Opgørelsen viser, at antallet af hadforbrydelser, bl.a. med homofobisk motiv, er større end hidtil antaget.

http://politiken.dk/debat/analyse/ECE1168156/homofobi-har-mange-ansigter/

Every third homosexual in Sweden have experiences hate crimes. No reason to believe the number is lower in Denmark.

Der er et stort antal overfald. I Sverige er det hver tredje homoseksuel, der har oplevet et hate crime. Der er ingen grund til at tro, at tallet skulle være lavere i Danmark.

http://www.lgbt.dk/247/

4% of all victims of violence say that the motive was homophobia or transphobia.

Det er lidt under hvert tiende offer, som mener, at de har været udsat for vold på grund af racisme, mens 4 % mener, at årsagen til volden kan have været homo- eller transfobi. Omregnet til hele befolkningen betyder det, at cirka 16.000 personer har været udsat for hadforbrydelser i 2008 - 2009.

http://www.dkr.dk/hadforbrydelser

From 2009 to 2011 sexuality as a motivation in hate crimes increased from 5.6% of all registered hate crimes (via 9% in 2010) to 6%.
https://www.pet.dk/Nyheder/2013/~/media/Forebyggende%20sikkerhed/RACI-rapporter/RACIRapport2011pdf.ashx

Most hate crimes go unreported. While around 12.000 Danes reported that they had been subjected to an attack in 2008 which they claimed were motivated by their ethnicity or sexuality, only 134 cases were reported by the Danish Security and Intelligence Service (PET).
http://videnskab.dk/kultur-samfund/danske-hate-crimes-skjult-i-morketal

[Ascelonia]

That only works if reading the thread will answer the question. I have read every post of this thread, and I do not recall any source for your claims being previously posted.

People posted links suggesting that Denmark was the best place for LGBT people. The whole debate is about anti-discrimination laws in Denmark. Then people make posts about how Denmark is actually pretty anti-gay. I drew a link between the first and the last points.

I suggest you all stop petting the one eyed snake, because this unholy act promotes sweaty palms and reduced vision, which must be why your responses are so bad.

[Premislyd]

Witty comment instead of an actual argument. Try again.

Jesus fuck do you guys both want to just jerk off in front of each other, or actually debate?

Haven't you read the thread?

[Gravlen]

Witty comment instead of an actual argument. Try again.

Jesus fuck do you guys both want to just jerk off in front of each other, or actually debate?

As you see, I have made an argument. Premislyd is not interested in a debate.

[Premislyd]

Jesus fuck do you guys both want to just jerk off in front of each other, or actually debate?

As you see, I have made an argument. Premislyd is not interested in a debate.

Petty attempts at witty rhetoric don't really count as debating.

Unless you Frisisisisisisisisivia of course.

[Condunum]

Jesus fuck do you guys both want to just jerk off in front of each other, or actually debate?

As you see, I have made an argument. Premislyd is not interested in a debate.

Indeed you did. Instead, he pendantically pointed out "lolnumbers" in lieu of an actual response.

[Ascelonia]

Jesus fuck do you guys both want to just jerk off in front of each other, or actually debate?

Masturbatory emissions constitute 97.5% of NSG's contributions to global warming. Al Gore would be proud.

[Condunum]

As you see, I have made an argument. Premislyd is not interested in a debate.

Petty attempts at witty rhetoric don't really count as debating.

Unless you Frisisisisisisisisivia of course.

So you weren't trying to be teh smurt gui by point out "lolnumbers!!!1!1!"

[Premislyd]

As you see, I have made an argument. Premislyd is not interested in a debate.

Indeed you did. Instead, he pendantically pointed out "lolnumbers" in lieu of an actual response.

It's really not my fault that he picked the two most biased sources out there.

[Condunum]

Indeed you did. Instead, he pendantically pointed out "lolnumbers" in lieu of an actual response.

It's really not my fault that he picked the two most biased sources out there.

Does that really matter? If you cannot debate the faults of a biased source, or the information therein, you have no place in debate. It's that simple. If it's biased or faulty, it should be easy for you.

[Gravlen]

That only works if reading the thread will answer the question. I have read every post of this thread, and I do not recall any source for your claims being previously posted.

People posted links suggesting that Denmark was the best place for LGBT people. The whole debate is about anti-discrimination laws in Denmark. Then people make posts about how Denmark is actually pretty anti-gay. I drew a link between the first and the last points.

Denmark IS one of the best places for LGBT people. Many Danes are still anti-gay, however. All this means is that the rest of the world by and large is really shitty towards LGBT people, when a country where violence against homosexuals still happen to a significant degree is the best they're offered.

[Premislyd]

It's really not my fault that he picked the two most biased sources out there.

Does that really matter? If you cannot debate the faults of a biased source, or the information therein, you have no place in debate. It's that simple. If it's biased or faulty, it should be easy for you.

It really does matter. It's really not that hard picking out an unbiased source.

[Gravlen]

Indeed you did. Instead, he pendantically pointed out "lolnumbers" in lieu of an actual response.

It's really not my fault that he picked the two most biased sources out there.

...out of five sources presented, all of which corroborated the information presented.

[Ascelonia]

Denmark IS one of the best places for LGBT people. Many Danes are still anti-gay, however. All this means is that the rest of the world by and large is really shitty towards LGBT people, when a country where violence against homosexuals still happen to a significant degree is the best they're offered.

Again. This is due to overreporting of violence elsewhere. Society has gotten to sensitive these days. People used to get in fights all the time without claiming it was racially-charged or anti-gay motivated.

[Premislyd]

It's really not my fault that he picked the two most biased sources out there.

...out of five sources presented, all of which corroborated the information presented.

They were clearly left-leaning and biased towards the gay agenda.

[Condunum]

Does that really matter? If you cannot debate the faults of a biased source, or the information therein, you have no place in debate. It's that simple. If it's biased or faulty, it should be easy for you.

It really does matter. It's really not that hard picking out an unbiased source.

If it's biased, point out the bias. What you say is biased doesn't matter. If you can't prove it, your contribution is null.

So, prove them wrong.