Five Nights At Freddy's creator, Scott Cawthon, has retired from game development

atoxique

Well-Known Member
Newcomer
Joined
Jan 14, 2019
Messages
73
Trophies
0
Age
22
Location
the Internet
XP
265
Country
Australia
If a person donates money to a vehemently anti-LGBT candidate like the former president, then that means the person either agrees with the candidate's anti-LGBT policies or tolerates them. The act of giving money to the anti-LGBT candidate is homophobic regardless.

Donald Trump was never vehemntly anti-LGBT rights and in fact he supported gay marriage, always respecting the Supreme Court's ruling in 2015 that the ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional. Stop lying. Scott donating money is not an "anti-LGBT act", here you prove my point that you leftists do not believe in nuance and only believe in black and white. How do you know Scott supports absolutely everything the Republican Party does? Did you ask him yourself? Do you support absolutely everything the Democrats do? If so, you might as well start calling yourself racist and homophobic because there are plenty of racist, homophobic Democrats too.

Also, it's quite funny how you pretend to not hate Christians in your post too, even though by your logic, the mere act of being a Christian (or Muslim, or Jew, or any other religion really) is "homophobic" even when said religious person does nothing actually homophobic.

If a person who is pro-LGBT wants to say "I disagree with X's anti-LGBT actions and I don't want to spend money X in the future," where is the problem? It sounds like you're anti-speech and anti-freedom to me.

Here you lefties go again coming up with bullshit. No one has ever said anything of the sort in this thread. The issue here is that Scott donated to a political party you don't like, and leftists rushed to go and slander, dox, harass and threaten him and his family for this.

You're only going to find condemnations of harassment, doxing, threats, etc. in this thread. Nobody is condoning those things. However, the existence harassment, doxing, threats, etc., while deplorable, doesn't make Scott's actions any less deplorable.

And here you prove my point that leftism is all about controlling what you're allowed to believe in and bullying those who don't believe in what you do. You really believe that Scott and his family should be threatened, doxed and harassed because he donated money to a political party you don't like. The fact you actually believe what Scott did and what leftists are doing to him are even remotely comparable is pathetic and actually deplorable (in the actual sense of the word, not the exaggerated way you're using it - proving my point that leftists just exaggerate their invented problems hoping people will jump on the bandwagon with them even though the "problem" isn't actually even real).

Anti-LGBT policies are real problems. Deluding oneself into thinking they don't cause objective harm and aren't a problem worth addressing comes from a very special place rooted in homophobia and/or privilege.

Where are the anti-LGBT policies and who exactly has been directly harmed by them? Oh that's right... there has been no anti-LGBT policies. Everytime an internet leftist tells me something is "anti-(insert group here)" it's always about a super hyped-up, exaggerated, doom-laden version of what the bill "could" do, yet there's never any focus on what the bill actually does and what actually happened after the bill was introduced. Of course, that's because the answer always is: these bills haven't actually done a damn thing against LGBT people, and the US is still a leading place on LGBT rights. Again, Trump never opposed LGBT rights during his presidency. Leftists invented that narrative, just like all the other false narratives you invented about Donald Trump.

This is about condemning actions that cause objective harm. If it's "leftist indoctrination" to not condone or stay silent about deplorable acts, sign me up.
  1. The "accusations" against Scott are not false.

Once again, this potential, exaggerated "objective harm" has never come to pass. The accusations against Scott are false. He is not a raging homophobe out to get The Gays. Scott has never done anything actually anti-LGBT. He and his family absolutely did not deserve to be harassed, doxed, and threatened. Stop parroting what you heard someone else say on Twitter, cut the cancel culture bullshit out, and stop lying.
 
Last edited by atoxique,

Purple_Shyguy

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
2,344
Trophies
2
Age
33
Location
Republic of Ireland
XP
4,732
Country
Legal immigrants sometimes commit violent crimes too. Should we bar them from entry too? You don't seem to understand that the "some people in Group X commit crimes" argument can apply to just about any group. People out after 9:00 PM sometimes commit violent crimes, so why not institute a mandatory curfew after 9:00? There's no argument you can't make using your reasoning, and it's not compelling.

I am also not making a case for illegal immigration. I'm making a case for fixing the broken immigration system, and a case for treating all immigrants like human beings without demonizing them.

"Sometimes". And nowhere near the rate as illegal immigrants do.

You obviously try to minimize legal immigrant crime by only allowing people with no criminal record. I have legal migrant uncles, my brother who live in Canada. They have to do a police background check to see if there's any criminal record before they're allowed in.

Stomp out illegal immigration and you'll stomp out cartels, organised crime, drug gangs, sex trafficking.
 
Last edited by Purple_Shyguy,

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
People saying they don't approve of the violence and threats, and then say:



So yeah. "I don't approve of the violence, I just rely on it and am grateful for its results."
I was referencing the boycotts and condemnations, as I've consistently said. I wholeheartedly condemn harassment, etc., as has everyone in this thread as far as I'm aware.
 

tabzer

This place is a meme.
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
5,844
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
4,911
Country
Japan
I was referencing the boycotts and condemnations, as I've consistently said. I wholeheartedly condemn harassment, etc., as has everyone in this thread as far as I'm aware.

You are wholeheartedly condemning whatshisface while tossing in your disclaimer to make it look like you aren't promoting hate mobs. The effort you demonstrate contradicts your words.

Like I said. "I don't approve of the violence, I just rely on it and am grateful for its results."

Why GBAtemp needs politicians, idk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BitMasterPlus

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
You are wholeheartedly condemning whatshisface
Yes, I wholeheartedly condemn Scott's actions. They are deserving of criticism and boycotts.

while tossing in your disclaimer to make it look like you aren't promoting hate mobs.
I wholeheartedly condemn harassment, doxing, death threats, etc.

Like I said. "I don't approve of the violence, I just rely on it and am grateful for its results."
I don't approve of the threats of violence. I haven't seen anyone here who does.

Donald Trump was never vehemntly anti-LGBT rights and in fact he supported gay marriage, always respecting the Supreme Court's ruling in 2015 that the ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional.
The former president's comments on same-sex marriage were inconsistent. You are right that he said he considered it "settled law," which is a step below being in favor of same-sex marriage. Regardless of what the former president said, you should look instead at what the former president did:
Trump does not support any part of the LGBT community. You might be able to find some comments here and there about how he supports the LGBT community, but actions speak louder than words. At every chance he had, he did what he could to strip rights away from the LGBT community. They spent years ignoring Pride Month. As soon as the former president was sworn in, LGBT resource pages on the White House website were removed. They tried to remove LGBT questions from the census in order to erase LGBT people. They tried to remove LGBT people from the equal employment policies at the commerce department. They banned trans people from the military for no reason other than to be anti-LGBT. They ordered the Department of Education to remove anti-discrimination policies relating to LGBT people. They explicitly said they'd reject civil rights complaints at the Department of Education relating to LGBT issues. They gave federal funds to private schools that explicitly discriminate against LGBT people. They removed healthcare protections for LGBT people, effectively making it so anyone could refuse health care to anybody who is LGBT, for any reason. They established an office within HHS to specifically defend people who refused medical care to LGBT people. They granted federal funds to foster programs that discriminated against LGBT people. They engaged in an outright effort to specifically erase trans people from all existing protections and acknowledgements online. They ordered the CDC to stop using words like "transgender." They created a rule to stop doing data collection on LGBT foster youth, creating significant impediments to helping them, all for no reason but to cause harm. They ordered the removal of questions relating to LGBT people from forms belonging to programs that help the elderly and disabled, hindering the ability to help those people's specific needs as well. They ordered the removal of anti-discrimination policies relating to LGBT people from HUD. They ordered HUD to permit shelters to deny entry to trans people. They ordered the cancellation of HUD surveys relating to LGBT needs. They ordered the Justice Department to argue in court against anti-LGBT discrimination. They rolled back previously existing protections for LGBT people in prisons. They rolled back anti-discrimination policies affecting LGBT federal contractors. They ordered the denial of visas to same-sex partners of diplomats. They ordered a rule change so that a child born of a same-sex couple born overseas via a surrogate wouldn't be eligible for US citizenship. They removed the US from the UN Human Rights Council with one of the main reasons being because of LGBT issues (they were friendly to LGBT people and LGBT issues). They refused to sign a statement condemning physical attacks against LGBT people overseas. They ordered the removal of a pro-LGBT program in the 4H program, hurting LGBT children. They've nominated numerous justices, including ones even controversial among the Republican Party, who are vehemently anti-LGBT. Under their policies, ICE as specifically mistreated LGBT inmates in their custody. They did and said nothing relating to anti-trans violence and murders in this country.
The former president was demonstrably anti-LGBT. In addition to the anti-LGBT policies above, he also appointed judges and justices who were anti-LGBT and anti-same-sex marriage. The former president saying the Supreme Court's 2015 decision on same-sex marriage is "settled law" and changing the topic doesn't come close to changing this.

Scott donating money is not an "anti-LGBT act", here you prove my point that you leftists do not believe in nuance and only believe in black and white. How do you know Scott supports absolutely everything the Republican Party does? Did you ask him yourself? Do you support absolutely everything the Democrats do? If so, you might as well start calling yourself racist and homophobic because there are plenty of racist, homophobic Democrats too.
As I've already said, giving money to a politician does not mean you support everything that politician says and does, but it does mean you tolerate it. Giving money to the former president isn't only anti-LGBT; it's anti-woman, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-immigrant child, anti-environment, anti-science, anti-democracy, anti-poor, etc. That's a lot Scott has to accept or tolerate in order to give the former president money.

Also, it's quite funny how you pretend to not hate Christians in your post too, even though by your logic, the mere act of being a Christian (or Muslim, or Jew, or any other religion really) is "homophobic" even when said religious person does nothing actually homophobic.
There are as many versions of Christianity, for example, as there are Christians. Just because a person is Christian does not make that person homophobic, despite what the Bible says. There are entire churches and groups of churches that are pro-LGBT. I still think Christianity has failed to meet its burden of proof and promotes anti-skepticism, but that is a separate issue, and it still doesn't cause me to "hate Christians."

And, again, there are Christians who are "radical lefties."

Here you lefties go again coming up with bullshit. No one has ever said anything of the sort in this thread. The issue here is that Scott donated to a political party you don't like, and leftists rushed to go and slander, dox, harass and threaten him and his family for this.
If the sole issue is that people are harassing, doxing, etc. Scott, then you and I are in agreement that this is deplorable behavior. However, it's not the only issue. The harassment directed against Scott does not somehow excuse Scott's own behavior. His behavior is still deserving of criticism.

And here you prove my point that leftism is all about controlling what you're allowed to believe in and bullying those who don't believe in what you do. You really believe that Scott and his family should be threatened, doxed and harassed because he donated money to a political party you don't like. The fact you actually believe what Scott did and what leftists are doing to him are even remotely comparable is pathetic and actually deplorable (in the actual sense of the word, not the exaggerated way you're using it - proving my point that leftists just exaggerate their invented problems hoping people will jump on the bandwagon with them even though the "problem" isn't actually even real).
Again, I condemn any harassment, doxing, etc. directed at Scott. That doesn't mean Scott's actions aren't deserving of criticism.

Where are the anti-LGBT policies and who exactly has been directly harmed by them? Oh that's right... there has been no anti-LGBT policies. Everytime an internet leftist tells me something is "anti-(insert group here)" it's always about a super hyped-up, exaggerated, doom-laden version of what the bill "could" do, yet there's never any focus on what the bill actually does and what actually happened after the bill was introduced. Of course, that's because the answer always is: these bills haven't actually done a damn thing against LGBT people, and the US is still a leading place on LGBT rights. Again, Trump never opposed LGBT rights during his presidency. Leftists invented that narrative, just like all the other false narratives you invented about Donald Trump.
See my list of the former president's anti-LGBT actions near the beginning of this post.

Once again, this potential, exaggerated "objective harm" has never come to pass. The accusations against Scott are false. He is not a raging homophobe out to get The Gays. Scott has never done anything actually anti-LGBT. He and his family absolutely did not deserve to be harassed, doxed, and threatened. Stop parroting what you heard someone else say on Twitter, cut the cancel culture bullshit out, and stop lying.
Giving money to a vehemently anti-LGBT politician is an anti-LGBT action. You and I are in agreement, however, that Scott should not be harassed, doxed, threatened, etc. He should, however, be criticized for his actions and boycotted.

"Sometimes". And nowhere near the rate as illegal immigrants do.
  1. Your the one who made the "sometimes" argument, not me. My point was that it was ridiculous because it was a "sometimes" argument.
  2. Illegal immigrants commit violent crimes at about half the rate as American citizens.
You obviously try to minimize legal immigrant crime by only allowing people with no criminal record. I have legal migrant uncles, my brother who live in Canada. They have to do a police background check to see if there's any criminal record before they're allowed in.
Again, I am not arguing in favor of illegal immigration. However, it's understandable that it happens when our legal immigration system is designed to fail. We need to fix our immigration system, offer a pathway to citizenship to illegal immigrants who are already here, stop demonizing illegal immigrants, stop deportations for those who haven't done anything wrong other than immigrate illegally, and stop talking about a wasteful wall that isn't going to do much if anything to curb illegal immigration.

Stomp out illegal immigration and you'll stomp out cartels, organised crime, drug gangs, sex trafficking.
  1. First, these things won't disappear by "stomping out" illegal immigration.
  2. "Building a wall" is not going to "stomp out" illegal immigration.
  3. Many illegal immigrants (and a lot of legal asylum seekers incorrectly labeled as illegal immigrants) are fleeing the cartels, organised crime, drug gangs, and sex trafficking that you're talking about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stealphie

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
Just because you don't promote policies for a particular group does not mean that you are "anti that group".
But when you promote anti-X policies, it means you are anti-X. And if you give money to a candidate who promotes anti-X policies, it means you are either anti-X or tolerate someone being anti-X.
 

tabzer

This place is a meme.
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
5,844
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
4,911
Country
Japan
I wholeheartedly condemn harassment, doxing, death threats, etc.

Lol. No, you don't. That's just a line with no more substance than a disclaimer. We see how "whole-hearted" Lacius can be when organizing pages of manifesto against politicians and individuals. "You are wrong by association."

You are so boring. When you run out of things to boycott, you'll have nothing left.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BitMasterPlus

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
Lol. No, you don't. That's just a line with no more substance than a disclaimer. We see how "whole-hearted" Lacius can be when organizing pages of manifesto against politicians and individuals. "You are wrong by association."

You are so boring. When you run out of things to boycott, you'll have nothing left.
I've never once given any indication that I support harassment of anybody.

While I support justified boycotts, and boycotting Scott, I am not boycotting Scott. I haven't thought of FNAF since 2014.
 

tabzer

This place is a meme.
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
5,844
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
4,911
Country
Japan
I've never once given any indication that I support harassment of anybody.

While I support justified boycotts, and boycotting Scott, I am not boycotting Scott. I haven't thought of FNAF since 2014.

If you indicate that you are "glad that he was 'cancelled'" you are indicating that you approve of the means. Otherwise, the adage of wanting to have your cake and eat it applies.

if i run out of things to boycott, i'll be quietly enjoying my life
bro, it is the natural state of things to not boycott things

Get off the internet bro!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BitMasterPlus

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
If you indicate that you are "glad that he was 'cancelled'" you are indicating that you approve of the means. Otherwise, the adage of wanting to have your cake and eat it applies.



Get off the internet bro!
I am glad when people are rightfully criticized and boycotted because of their deplorable actions, which I would probably call "cancellation." Nothing about that suggests I condone harassment of any kind.

If you can't have a conversation about this without completely fabricating my position, you're probably on the wrong side.
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
Calling what happened to Scott "cancelled", and approving of it certainly does.
I specifically described what I mean (and what most people mean) by "cancellation," and it doesn't include harassment. And, as I've said numerous times, I don't condone harassment.

Again, if the only way for you to make an argument is to fabricate my position, and say to say my position is the opposite of what I've said it is, you're grasping at straws.
 

tabzer

This place is a meme.
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
5,844
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
4,911
Country
Japan
I specifically described what I mean (and what most people mean) by "cancellation," and it doesn't include harassment. And, as I've said numerous times, I don't condone harassment.

You are free to BS as much as you'd like. Scott was "cancelled", as in past-tense. You appreciate that. The method he was "cancelled" by is completely contradictory to your back-pedaling claim of what "cancellation" means.

"I'm glad Abe Lincoln was cancelled, but I don't approve of violence." -Lacius probably.
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
You are free to BS as much as you'd like. Scott was "cancelled", as in past-tense. You appreciate that. The method he was "cancelled" by is completely contradictory to your back-pedaling claim of what "cancellation" means.

"I'm glad Abe Lincoln was cancelled, but I don't approve of violence." -Lacius probably.
Scott's actions were deplorable and deserving of condemnation and boycotts. That is not an endorsement of harassment, and I've consistently condemned harassment.
 

tabzer

This place is a meme.
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
5,844
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
4,911
Country
Japan
Scott's actions were deplorable and deserving of condemnation and boycotts. That is not an endorsement of harassment, and I've consistently condemned harassment.

Oh, hi Lacius, did you want to change the topic? While I agree that the phrase "Scott's actions were deplorable and deserving of condemnation and boycotts" is not an endorsement of harassment by itself, it doesn't really address the point that has been made about your contradiction and fake lip service.
 

Lacius

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
18,099
Trophies
3
XP
18,338
Country
United States
Oh, hi Lacius, did you want to change the topic? While I agree that the phrase "Scott's actions were deplorable and deserving of condemnation and boycotts" is not an endorsement of harassment by itself, it doesn't really address the point that has been made about your contradiction and fake lip service.
If you're going to say I've contradicted myself, please provide a specific example. The only points I've made throughout this thread are the ones in my previous post. Scott's actions were deplorable and deserving of condemnation and boycotts. That is not an endorsement of harassment, and I've consistently condemned harassment.

If, however, you're just going to baselessly assert that anyone who is critical of Scott's actions is a proponent of harassment, you probably shouldn't even bother. Scott's actions are deserving of criticism, regardless of whether or not his actions caused him to receive harassment.
 

tabzer

This place is a meme.
Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
5,844
Trophies
1
Age
39
XP
4,911
Country
Japan
Look. If you came into a thread of someone who got hit by a bus and died while jay-walking and said,"good riddance to this person, they supported lawlessness and deserve condemnation," followed by pages describing how righteous you are, I'd be making the same argument. By action, you are fortifying the outcome while spewing BS out of both sides of your mouth. A little tyrant wannabe.

his actions caused him to receive harassment.

Tell me more.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2: Lol rappers still promoting crypto