Drunken dad asks 11 year old Son to Drive

[Embracer Of Darkness]

imo attempting to convince an alcoholic that binge drinking & excessive drinking might just be bad for them is alot like attempting to convince a fundie that the bible might just be wrong.

So we're alcoholics now? Funny, I didn't think getting drunk one night every two weeks counted. Not to mention that I've not touched alcohol in three weeks anyway.

learn to read, cunt. i've already stated in response to BS making THE EXACT SAME ACCUSATION that i was not referring to anyone on this board.

Then maybe you should check your wording, because it fucking sounded like it. I'm obviously not the first to say so either, as you just said, fuckwit.

[General Zod]

yes, except I ALREADY EXPLAINED WHAT I MEANT WHEN ACCUSED THE FIRST TIME. it's not my fucking fault that you didn't read the entire thread.

[SAMAS]

Reckless, yes, but not stupid. I would consider it stupid if it caused harm to others though.

So you don't see recklessness as stupid?

No, I do not. I see recklessness as something which is fun as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. It makes this dull, boring, spoon feeding fucking society exciting, if you must know.

In other words, it's not stupid because you're the only person who's at risk? Stupidity doesn't come with a minimum limit. After all, a Darwin Award is only give to those who only risked themselves for their stupidity.

But that's the whole point of recklessness. Doing something stupid(often dangeroulsy so) for fun. Just because it's fun, or you chose to do it to yourself only doesn't make it any less stupid. It just lessens collateral damage(mostly) if you screw up.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

In other words, it's not stupid because you're the only person who's at risk? Stupidity doesn't come with a minimum limit. After all, a Darwin Award is only give to those who only risked themselves for their stupidity.

The way I see it, yes. I think it's less stupid because I'm the only one at risk. I've jumped my mountain bike down rocky hills densely covered by trees, and I don't think it's stupid. I think it's fun.

I think the difference between that and a Darwin award, is that Darwin award winners are generally not aware that what they're doing is harmful until it's too late. I already know what I'm doing is harmful, therefore it's simply being reckless, not stupid.

But that's the whole point of recklessness. Doing something stupid(often dangeroulsy so) for fun. Just because it's fun, or you chose to do it to yourself only doesn't make it any less stupid. It just lessens collateral damage(mostly) if you screw up.

I just think there's a big gap between "stupid" and "reckless". It's a matter of semantics though.

[Darth Servo]

No, I do not. I see recklessness as something which is fun as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. It makes this dull, boring, spoon feeding fucking society exciting, if you must know.

If you need a chemical to have any fun then you've just conceeded the argument. I've never had a drink in my entire life and my life is anything but dull or boring.

And what about all the times you clearly said "If you need alcohol to have fun then you're sad" or whatever? Fuck you.

See above. if you think alcohol is the only way to have any fun then I accept your concession to this debate.

[Darth Servo]

The way I see it, yes. I think it's less stupid because I'm the only one at risk. I've jumped my mountain bike down rocky hills densely covered by trees, and I don't think it's stupid. I think it's fun.

So you DO concede that it IS stupid, just less stupid.

I think the difference between that and a Darwin award, is that Darwin award winners are generally not aware that what they're doing is harmful until it's too late. I already know what I'm doing is harmful, therefore it's simply being reckless, not stupid.

People get Darwin awards because they did something that got them killed and anyone with a brain would see that those activities were completely moronic like the guy who played Russian Roulette with a semi automatic. No THINKING person would EVER do those things.

I just think there's a big gap between "stupid" and "reckless". It's a matter of semantics though.

And that gap would be....

Is there no one in your life that would be hurt if you got yourself killed? No one that would be severly burdened if you wound up in the hospital? If your family doesn't feel that way they are severly screwed up. If your friends don't feel that way about you then they aren't true friends.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

No, I do not. I see recklessness as something which is fun as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. It makes this dull, boring, spoon feeding fucking society exciting, if you must know.

If you need a chemical to have any fun then you've just conceeded the argument. I've never had a drink in my entire life and my life is anything but dull or boring.

And what about all the times you clearly said "If you need alcohol to have fun then you're sad" or whatever? Fuck you.

See above. if you think alcohol is the only way to have any fun then I accept your concession to this debate.

How many times have I said so far that I'm not an alcoholic? I don't need alcohol to have fun, I can always play some music or take my bike on the slopes if I want fun. Alcohol is just another form of fun for me, a more social and relaxing one.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

The way I see it, yes. I think it's less stupid because I'm the only one at risk. I've jumped my mountain bike down rocky hills densely covered by trees, and I don't think it's stupid. I think it's fun.

So you DO concede that it IS stupid, just less stupid.

I just added emphasis to the original quote.

People get Darwin awards because they did something that got them killed and anyone with a brain would see that those activities were completely moronic like the guy who played Russian Roulette with a semi automatic. No THINKING person would EVER do those things.

Obviously he did not see the danger in playing Russian Roulette with an automatic and it got him killed. I, however, do see the dangers in drinking, biking, and extreme metal gigs. Reckless, not stupid.

Is there no one in your life that would be hurt if you got yourself killed? No one that would be severly burdened if you wound up in the hospital? If your family doesn't feel that way they are severly screwed up. If your friends don't feel that way about you then they aren't true friends.

That's not even relevent. Of course there are people that would be hurt if I died, but not physically, which is the argument at hand. My friends probably worry at the very thought of me taking my bike out, but it wouldn't harm them physically. Someone might worry about you every time you set foot on a plane, or out of your home at night, so don't try giving me that bullshit.

[Darth Wong]

So you don't see recklessness as stupid?

No, I do not. I see recklessness as something which is fun as long as it doesn't harm anyone else.

So Russian Roulette is not stupid in your opinion?

It makes this dull, boring, spoon feeding fucking society exciting, if you must know.

Instead of consuming toxic substances to impair your brain function to the point that you forget how shitty your life is, how about you try improving your life instead, genius?

No, you're an absolute fucking moron.

In your fucking opinion, dickhead.

Nope, you proved it yourself by drawing a laughably stupid false-dilemma fallacy between drinking yourself into a stupor and a "paranoid fucking candyland lifestyle." It's not my fault that you inadvertently demonstrated your own stupidity.

Some of us just simply like doing risky things, as long as they don't harm others. Oh well, if I'm an "absolute fucking moron" for doing those things, then maybe I think you're "absolutely fucking boring". Fucking jackass.

Fine, think that if you like. Since you apparently think "boring" is anyone who doesn't get drunk or engage in other reckless behaviour, it's pretty clear that your brain has already begun suffering permanent damage from the alcohol abuse.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

So Russian Roulette is not stupid in your opinion?

Russian Roulette is reckless.

It makes this dull, boring, spoon feeding fucking society exciting, if you must know.

Instead of consuming toxic substances to impair your brain function to the point that you forget how shitty your life is, how about you try improving your life instead, genius?

Oh, what's that Mr. Wong? You're talking shit again? I already said a bunch of times that I'm don't drink because my life is shit, or to forget about problems. I drink to, and I quote, "augment fun". STFU.

Fine, think that if you like. Since you apparently think "boring" is anyone who doesn't get drunk or engage in other reckless behaviour, it's pretty clear that your brain has already begun suffering permanent damage from the alcohol abuse.

No different to you thinking that anyone who drinks or engages in reckless behaviour is stupid, so fuck you dumbass.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

Just a question for you, Wong...

Why do you think people have been getting drunk since Mesopotamia?

Something tells me you'll give a retarded answer like "they're all idiotic addicts", but go ahead, let's hear it. Explain why it's been done for so long if it's so bad.

[Darth Wong]

So Russian Roulette is not stupid in your opinion?

Russian Roulette is reckless.

You didn't answer the question. You just said that recklessness is not stupid if it affects no one but yourself. Russian Roulette is reckless and affects no one but yourself. Does that mean it's not stupid in your opinion?

Instead of consuming toxic substances to impair your brain function to the point that you forget how shitty your life is, how about you try improving your life instead, genius?

Oh, what's that Mr. Wong? You're talking shit again? I already said a bunch of times that I'm don't drink because my life is shit, or to forget about problems. I drink to, and I quote, "augment fun". STFU.

And now you resort to outright lies. You said "It makes this dull, boring, spoon feeding fucking society exciting" which obviously means you think you need alcohol in order to have an interesting life.

Fine, think that if you like. Since you apparently think "boring" is anyone who doesn't get drunk or engage in other reckless behaviour, it's pretty clear that your brain has already begun suffering permanent damage from the alcohol abuse.

No different to you thinking that anyone who drinks or engages in reckless behaviour is stupid, so fuck you dumbass.

And interestingly enough, you refused to directly answer my earlier question about Russian Roulette which cuts to the heart of your claim that recklessness is not stupid.

Just a question for you, Wong...

Why do you think people have been getting drunk since Mesopotamia?

Because stupidity is not a new invention, moron. Or perhaps you think appeals to tradition are not a logical fallacy?

[Embracer Of Darkness]

You didn't answer the question. You just said that recklessness is not stupid if it affects no one but yourself. Russian Roulette is reckless and affects no one but yourself. Does that mean it's not stupid in your opinion?

I did answer your question. I said Russian Roulette is reckless, and reckless activities fall under a different category than stupid or wrong in my opinion.

And now you resort to outright lies. You said "It makes this dull, boring, spoon feeding fucking society exciting" which obviously means you think you need alcohol in order to have an interesting life.

Don't be a fucking retard, Wong, you know full well I was talking about reckless activities making life exciting, not just getting drunk.

And interestingly enough, you refused to directly answer my earlier question about Russian Roulette which cuts to the heart of your claim that recklessness is not stupid.

Actually, dumbass, I did answer your question, and I've answered it again at the top of this post in a "spelling out" fashion just for your benefit.

Because stupidity is not a new invention, moron. Or perhaps you think appeals to tradition are not a logical fallacy?

So you're saying again that all people who get drunk are stupid. I thought you denied these sweeping generalisations. Get lost, clown.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

Or perhaps you think appeals to tradition are not a logical fallacy?

Actually, I just thought about this... It's not an appeal to tradition, because I wasn't saying "people have been getting drunk since Mesapotamia just because it's how things are done", I was saying that people have been doing it since Mesapotamia because it is fun.

Unless "appeal to fun" is a fallacy, get bent jackass.

[Darth Wong]

I did answer your question. I said Russian Roulette is reckless, and reckless activities fall under a different category than stupid or wrong in my opinion.

No, you did not answer my question. Is Russian Roulette stupid or not? You honestly can't come up with a straight answer to this question?

Don't be a fucking retard, Wong, you know full well I was talking about reckless activities making life exciting, not just getting drunk.

So? That's just as bad; it's simply a broader statement based on the same mentality.

Actually, dumbass, I did answer your question, and I've answered it again at the top of this post in a "spelling out" fashion just for your benefit.

Nope, you did not answer the question. Instead, you're evading it, as if there's no way to directly answer yes or no. It's hardly an ambiguous question.

Because stupidity is not a new invention, moron. Or perhaps you think appeals to tradition are not a logical fallacy?

So you're saying again that all people who get drunk are stupid. I thought you denied these sweeping generalisations. Get lost, clown.

When did I deny sweeping generalization, moron? It's fucking stupid to get "smashed". I said that earlier, I'll say it again. Your pathetic attempts to evade simple direct questions notwithstanding, your only argument is the same one basically made by BS: "how DARE you say that something I do is stupid!"

[Embracer Of Darkness]

I did answer your question. I said Russian Roulette is reckless, and reckless activities fall under a different category than stupid or wrong in my opinion.

No, you did not answer my question. Is Russian Roulette stupid or not? You honestly can't come up with a straight answer to this question?

If you can't see that I clearly answered your question, then you shouldn't be worried about my brain cells. The answer, to spell it out for you (even thought I shouldn't have to got a non-drinker supposedly as intelligent and godlike as you), was that I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act, but I believe it is a reckless act.

Don't be a fucking retard, Wong, you know full well I was talking about reckless activities making life exciting, not just getting drunk.

So? That's just as bad; it's simply a broader statement based on the same mentality.

False, idiot. The former indicates that I am a thrillseeker, and the latter would've indicated that I was an addict. You're just poking and prodding until I'll say what you want me to say, which quite frankly makes me think you're bordering on being an immature fucking asshole.

When did I deny sweeping generalization, moron? It's fucking stupid to get "smashed". I said that earlier, I'll say it again.

So you admit to your sweeping generalisation. Thank you, you are an idiot.

Your pathetic attempts to evade simple direct questions notwithstanding, your only argument is the same one basically made by BS: "how DARE you say that something I do is stupid!"

Again, I was not evading the question, you were simply either ignoring the answer to make me look evasive or you actually didn't understand my answer in which case you're retarded.

As for you dictating my argument for me, maybe you should read back to where I spelled out my entire argument in one sentence: "An' it harm none, do what thou wilt." Fuckwit.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

(even thought I shouldn't have to got a non-drinker supposedly as intelligent and godlike as you)

I am too fucking tired... What I meant to type was "even though I shouldn't have to, for a non-drinker supposedly as intelligent and godlike as you".

[Darth Wong]

I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act

Thank you. That is all the evidence I need to prove that you're an idiot.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act

Thank you. That is all the evidence I need to prove that you're an idiot.

If the only way you can debate is by missing out the other half of my argument, then you are a complete tit.

Notice how I said Russian Roulette is still reckless? You're such a dumbass.

[Darth Wong]

I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act

Thank you. That is all the evidence I need to prove that you're an idiot.

If the only way you can debate is by missing out the other half of my argument, then you are a complete tit.

Notice how I said Russian Roulette is still reckless? You're such a dumbass.

Nope, I saw the part where you reiterated your bizarre belief that self-destructive recklessness is not stupid. The point stands; you think Russian Roulette is not stupid, which says all I need.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

Nope, I saw the part where you reiterated your bizarre belief that self-destructive recklessness is not stupid. The point stands; you think Russian Roulette is not stupid, which says all I need.

You're such a moron. You do note how I think that self-destructive behaviour is still reckless, right? I'm sorry Wong, but you're a wall of fucking ignorance.

[aerius]

So Russian Roulette isn't stupid? I guess jumping off highway bridges ain't stupid either, and neither is beating yourself in the head with a ball bat or diving headfirst out a 10th story window. It's not stupid, it's reckless. Reminds me of something a stupid redneck we were mocking in a bar said. "I'm not a Hick, I'm a Southerner!", stupid hick.

[Embracer Of Darkness]

I think the problem you are having Aerius, and Wong too, is my belief in "an' it harm none, do what thou wilt".

Your problem.

[aerius]

Yeah, so it's perfectly fine as long as no one gets hurt...yeah...whatever...l

[Embracer Of Darkness]

Yeah, so it's perfectly fine as long as no one gets hurt...yeah...whatever...l

In my opinion it does make it perfectly fine, where is the problem in that? If I want to get absolutely pissed, and the only damage I cause is to myself and not other people, I think it's fine. If I want to speed my bike down a rocky hillside which is totally littered with trees, and no harm would come to other people, I think it's fine.

I really don't see the problem with this?