Jump to content


Silver Donor
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

902 Sterling

About Leftfield

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
    Appleton, WI
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,892 profile views
  1. Well, since I stated that homosexuality was not normal, in terms of not being the majority of the population, I figured that pretty well addressed the ridiculous cucumber/necrophilia thing. With so many definitions being thrown about, I'll just say this: Homosexuality is obviously not normal in the sense that it is the majority, but it is normal in the sense that it occurs regularly. It is natural in that it is not a choice. And sexual orientation is not the same as a sexual fetish.
  2. I didn't say homosexuality was normal because that would imply it was the majority of the population. Being left-handed also isn't normal, but they are both naturally occurring. However, with your comparison, you've completely revealed your disdain for homosexuals. You're comparing them to people with fetishes for inanimate objects, which cannot give consent and provide no reciprocation of pleasure or caring. You're basically saying that homosexuals only see their partners as sex objects. Certainly that is sometimes the case, just as it is for heterosexuals, but not for committed relation
  3. It's estimated that less than 1% of the population has a genius level IQ. Synesthesia occurs in 2-4% of the population. 10-12% are left-handed. None of these are "normal", but they have no negative connotations. Consciously or not, you used only negative abnormalities as examples, and psychopathy is not generally a sexual abnormality. You can find it as predictable as you like, but would you have used those examples if you were talking about someone who could only be sexually aroused by women with green eyes, or curly hair? You may not be arguing this from a moral standpoint, but your cho
  4. I appreciate that you feel homosexuality is not a choice. However, I wonder if you are conscious of the fact that just about everything you've compared homosexuality to, including psychopaths and pedophiles, is extremely negative. You are vilifying a behavior that, outside of offending the sensibilities we as a society have imposed over time, has no effect on anyone outside of a consenting relationship. Pedophilia, while involuntary, by definition is an attack and harms another person. Usually when a psychopath is diagnosed it's because they've harmed someone or themselves, or just can't funct
  5. Don't think I've heard that it's too late to make a difference. I do know some scientists believe that it may be too late to avoid some severe consequences and now it's a matter of mitigation. I see it as sort of akin to the "Foundation" series: If we see an inevitable catastrophe coming, shouldn't we work to limit the damage, to increase chances of survival and allow those that remain to rebuild sooner?
  6. I thought it was glorious. It's rare that someone puts that much effort into showing they have no idea what they're talking about.
  7. A Trump mouthpiece complaining about unacceptable comments and breaking norms? That would be the funniest thing I've read in a while if it weren't so pathetic. Anyone who knew anything about the pandemic knew that Fauci disagreed with the way Trump was handling it. It was no secret - Fauci had been trying to steer him to handle it responsibly for months. He was as diplomatic with his answer as he could possibly be. Just because you didn't like his answer doesn't mean he was being political. While he serves at the pleasure of the President, his duty is to the American people. He saw the di
  8. Someone asked him a question, he answered truthfully, and you say that's him becoming political? Would you prefer that he lied? It's not like he held a press conference or released a written statement. I wonder if you noticed that he was right? The surge began in earnest right around that time.
  9. I plainly said in my post that I was not originally making a distinction between eradicated and eliminated. Had I known the context of the video you were going to post, I would have used the word eradicated, as that was the argument you were making. So in the definition you were pushing you were wrong...Fauci did not say that. I already admitted that the quote from Walensky was a poor generalization, since taken out of the context of the CDCs actual findings, which you are consciously doing in a vain attempt to win an argument, is misleading. What she said was irresponsible, but there's a
  10. You really do only hear what you want, don't you? First of all, you were the one that used the term "eradicate," and Fauci plainly makes a distinction between eradicate and eliminate (which I wasn't, hence why I used the term "eliminate"). So even on the semantic level where you try to "catch" him, you fail. Good Lord, man, he says within the first 20 seconds of the video that it won't be eradicated. Secondly, even when he said "eliminate," he says it in regards to "in some countries," which is not an unreasonable assertion, considering the small population density and remoteness of some
  11. Fauci has never claimed that Covid was likely to be eliminated. He has said the exact opposite since very early into the pandemic. Similarly, the CDC never said you couldn't catch the virus. The efficacy of all the vaccines was tested and announced well before the general public began receiving them. The CDC has maintained all along that vaccines are not 100% effective. You also ignore the fact that the vaccines were developed before the Delta variant came about, which is why they aren't as effective against it. The Delta variant didn't emerge until the same month the Pfize
  12. Well, I guess I interpret his intent as pushing to get people vaccinated. Is there some other way I should see it? Has he done something outside of his authority? Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it a march to communism. Considering the very people who won't get vaccinated are primarily the ones taking Biden to task for failing to meet his vaccination goals, I'm wondering what you would suggest he do in order to keep his election promise. In reference to the bolded sentence, can you please explain to me why going after those committing violence against airline employ
  13. I just don't understand how you can be so blind to what you're saying. ANY increase in spread means more sick and dead people. You're saying that's irrelevant? I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't if it killed someone you knew. You've pointed out that you're vaccinated, but your points almost always go to supporting vaccine hesitancy and/or the fallacy that vaccines don't make a significant difference in spread. I can only guess as to why that's the case. For so many (not saying this is you) it seems predicated on the belief that the government and corporations are trying to grab more power
  • Create New...