Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by masterbouncer, May 15, 2020.
I hope it doesn't happen this way.
Sounds like a terrible rule change and no I am NOT racist.
Unfortunately you are wrong. You are a racist. A 2020 racist is defined as any individual who does not want to take skin color into consideration when making personnel decisions. You just didn't get the memo from the Nunch.
I wish Bill would hire a former NFL WR as our WRs Coach, preferably one with experience, and if he happened to be black, then that's a win-win...
Why do you guys care so much if some lefty queer calls you a racist?
Aren't you all strong, gargantuan dicked alpha males? My soyboy, genderfluid ass calling you a racist shouldn't matter at all to you towering pillars of masculinity.
Don't let him fool you. The Cornshucker can handle the big cobs.
It doesn't matter.
Yeah, I often post a ton about stuff I think doesn't matter.
This is how the written word comes up short in these types of conversations. Proper word emphasis and context are lost.
"It doesn't matter" was a direct response to your gender questioning, male genital-obsessed post. It wasn't referring to the subject of the thread.
Keep trying...you'll get there.
Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me.
FWIW, Lefty Queer won 20 games and the Shy Young award pitching for the Albuequerque Sun Queens last season.
Opinions cannot be wrong, even though I understand where you're coming from.
For example, let's use your example of claiming Belichick isn't the GOAT. There is nothing inherently right or wrong about that subjective take on his coaching. You claim that the opinion, however, is wrong if it cites Belichick didn't win the most Super Bowls. However, does the rationale for an opinion make the opinion itself -- sans any explanation -- right or wrong?
Let's use a Schrödinger's cat-like approach.
In scenario one, I claim Belichick isn't the GOAT and leave it at that. In this scenario, my opinion is neither right nor wrong.
In scenario two, I claim Belichick isn't the GOAT and note he hasn't won the most Super Bowls. The facts that I cite are wrong, but is the opinion itself?
In both scenarios, I claim Belichick isn't the GOAT as my opinion. Across both scenarios that opinion doesn't change although I do supply in the second scenario additional anecdotal rationale for the opinion offered. But can the same exact opinion -- Belichick isn't the GOAT -- be neither right nor wrong in one scenario but wrong in another?
My answer would be a resounding no. In both cases the exact same opinion gets shared just with different degrees of context. But that context doesn't shift the general opinion.
But if an opinion is built on false assumptions, what does that render the opinion? How would you describe that? Maybe moot? or ???
But that’s not what I said.
I said an opinion cannot be right or wrong but an opinion can be based upon an incorrect fact. That does not make the opinion wrong, it makes it based upon an incorrect fact.
Of course the distinction here would be that a discussion or “argument” about opinions is very different when discussing whether the opinion is right or wrong, which is pointless vs discussing the underlying facts.
Separate names with a comma.