Fish Shall Not Be Eaten

[Galloism]

I support all kinds of childhood oppression. Making children brush their teeth, go to bed at a certain hour, eat food their parents cook, not spend too long in front of the TV, do their homework, subject them to involuntary immunizations - all sorts of things.

You're arousing me. Tell us more. Spank some values into those kiddie slaves!

sorta got dark all of the sudden.

[Galloism]

It's only oppression if the religious do it. It's liberation if the antireligious do it.

I never said that.

Please don't engage in misrepresentation of other people's views. Your leaps of logic will not go unnoticed.

Actually, I'm being deliberately flippant towards this insanity being drug into yet another thread.

[Infected Mushroom]

I never said that.

Please don't engage in misrepresentation of other people's views. Your leaps of logic will not go unnoticed.

Actually, I'm being deliberately flippant towards this insanity being drug into yet another thread.

that sentence makes no sense

[Galloism]

Actually, I'm being deliberately flippant towards this insanity being drug into yet another thread.

that sentence makes no sense

Then it's in the right thread.

[The Alexanderians]

I never said that.

Please don't engage in misrepresentation of other people's views. Your leaps of logic will not go unnoticed.

Actually, I'm being deliberately flippant towards this insanity being drug into yet another thread.

The sad part is you're making more logic than he is

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Actually, I'm being deliberately flippant towards this insanity being drug into yet another thread.

that sentence makes no sense

Makes perfect sense. He's calling this thread and its topic insane. Tada!

[Infected Mushroom]

that sentence makes no sense

Makes perfect sense. He's calling this thread and its topic insane. Tada!

not with the sentence he just uttered

also, that's not a productive statement nor does it help advance the inquiry

[The Alexanderians]

Actually, I'm being deliberately flippant towards this insanity being drug into yet another thread.

that sentence makes no sense

The frequency with which you say that worries me

[Infected Mushroom]

Actually, I'm being deliberately flippant towards this insanity being drug into yet another thread.

The sad part is you're making more logic than he is

the sad part is that you are also choosing not to contribute to the thread

[The Alexanderians]

Makes perfect sense. He's calling this thread and its topic insane. Tada!

not with the sentence he just uttered

also, that's not a productive statement nor does it help advance the inquiry

So about as much as has been done by his opposition

[The Alexanderians]

The sad part is you're making more logic than he is

the sad part is that you are also choosing not to contribute to the thread

Then say something more to the topic and we'll respond to it. Most of what can be said has been said, so just continue with a point and we'll respond.

[Infected Mushroom]

the sad part is that you are also choosing not to contribute to the thread

Then say something more to the topic and we'll respond to it. Most of what can be said has been said, so just continue with a point and we'll respond.

I am merely responding to the attempted misrepresentation on the part of another poster (of my position), I am not at fault

[Diopolis]

Makes perfect sense. He's calling this thread and its topic insane. Tada!

not with the sentence he just uttered

That sentence is pretty unambiguous as to what it means.

[Galnius]

But forcing them to eat pork isn't? Nice logic there.

no one is forced

And no one is forced by their parents not to. Will they be punished? By some, the radicals may punish. However, it seems you would rather anyone who teaches their child not to eat something specific due to culture or religion punished. In fact, you are FORCING their parents to leave out specific parts of their beliefs and cultures. By you, if you didnt know, Im referencing your ideals.

[Galnius]

Then say something more to the topic and we'll respond to it. Most of what can be said has been said, so just continue with a point and we'll respond.

I am merely responding to the attempted misrepresentation on the part of another poster (of my position), I am not at fault

One cannot represent your position clearly when you don't state unambiguously what it means, you know what I mean?

[Infected Mushroom]

no one is forced

And no one is forced by their parents not to. Will they be punished? By some, the radicals may punish. However, it seems you would rather anyone who teaches their child not to eat something specific due to culture or religion punished. In fact, you are FORCING their parents to leave out specific parts of their beliefs and cultures. By you, if you didnt know, Im referencing your ideals.

reasonable use of force to prevent unjustifiable force is generally justified

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Then say something more to the topic and we'll respond to it. Most of what can be said has been said, so just continue with a point and we'll respond.

I am merely responding to the attempted misrepresentation on the part of another poster (of my position), I am not at fault

I'll be very honest with you. Since this is the reaction most people in NS have to your threads, I rather suspect that no, no one is misrepresenting you but, rather that yes, you come across that way. Constantly.

I truly advise you take a step back and think. Nothing you have posited in NS seems to make any sense whatsoever. I'm not being mean, or trying to be. I do puzzle.

[Infected Mushroom]

I am merely responding to the attempted misrepresentation on the part of another poster (of my position), I am not at fault

I'll be very honest with you. Since this is the reaction most people in NS have to your threads, I rather suspect that no, no one is misrepresenting you but, rather that yes, you come across that way. Constantly.

I truly advise you take a step back and think. Nothing you have posited in NS seems to make any sense whatsoever. I'm not being mean, or trying to be. I do puzzle.

If I never said X and you say I said X or stand for X, thats likely a misrepresentation. And he made the mistake.

[Infected Mushroom]

I am merely responding to the attempted misrepresentation on the part of another poster (of my position), I am not at fault

One cannot represent your position clearly when you don't state unambiguously what it means, you know what I mean?

the position is unambiguously stated in this OP

attach anything else to it at your own peril

[Galloism]

Makes perfect sense. He's calling this thread and its topic insane. Tada!

not with the sentence he just uttered

also, that's not a productive statement nor does it help advance the inquiry

This presumes that there is actually a valid inquiry to advance in this thread. In point of fact, it's just like every Kefka thread ever.

"We should ban... hey, spin the wheel, that's how this works!!!... NOT serving pork!"

"Wait, you put a negative ban in there?"

"Shut up! I'm almost out of ideas!"

Seriously, this is no different than the threads where you wanted to ban dogs, ban suits, ban privacy, ban taxes, ban boxing... and now it's to ban NOT serving pork to your children because... oppression.

Worst of all, it's a copycat thread from the French removal of pork alternatives in school, where you decided to take that bit of insanity that was present in that thread, and make its OWN thread.

You're damn right I'm flippant. There's no valid inquiry to advance here - just like every single damn one of your threads ever.

[Galnius]

And no one is forced by their parents not to. Will they be punished? By some, the radicals may punish. However, it seems you would rather anyone who teaches their child not to eat something specific due to culture or religion punished. In fact, you are FORCING their parents to leave out specific parts of their beliefs and cultures. By you, if you didnt know, Im referencing your ideals.

reasonable use of force to prevent unjustifiable force is generally justified

So you would use force upon the non-radicals, or the radicals who say "timeout", and force them to do something they dont believe in? They are trying to assist their children from not being seen as unclean in the eyes of their people and their god(s), as for most of a childs life he will be around those people and that culture. It is actually BETTER for the childs welfare to be taught such things in those circumstances, and to decide whether to follow it later on. It is good for development of every form. Social, emotional, mental, all of it. Or would you rather cultures NOT be taught?

[Galloism]

reasonable use of force to prevent unjustifiable force is generally justified

So you would use force upon the non-radicals, or the radicals who say "timeout", and force them to do something they dont believe in? They are trying to assist their children from not being seen as unclean in the eyes of their people and their god(s), as for most of a childs life he will be around those people and that culture. It is actually BETTER for the childs welfare to be taught such things in those circumstances, and to decide whether to follow it later on. It is good for development of every form. Social, emotional, mental, all of it. Or would you rather cultures NOT be taught?

Just when it's a culture he doesn't approve of.

[Galnius]

One cannot represent your position clearly when you don't state unambiguously what it means, you know what I mean?

the position is unambiguously stated in this OP

attach anything else to it at your own peril

Your position stated their is that you do not believe children should be punished for eating fish, when you failed to even provide the degree of punishment

[Galnius]

One cannot represent your position clearly when you don't state unambiguously what it means, you know what I mean?

the position is unambiguously stated in this OP

attach anything else to it at your own peril

One can also not continue with the thread if you do not listen, as you ignore everything stated that even minorly conflicts with YOUR views

[Galloism]

the position is unambiguously stated in this OP

attach anything else to it at your own peril

Your position stated their is that you do not believe children should be punished for eating fish, when you failed to even provide the degree of punishment

Let's go with summary execution.

Since he won't provide a punishment in his OP no matter how many times asked, I'll provide one on his behalf.