How can I be avoiding the situation when I clearly requested clarification? I thought you were not in favor of ad hominems, which, btw, is only a fallacy when an attack of character is used in place of a valid argument.
As long as one repeats the same mantras which were never advocated in the original post - the issue of responding with false scenarios - one has no business asking for clarification. You already noted where you didn't check out the videos - and even outside of the videos, it was noted directly what the issue was. Others noted it as well - and thus, till you can get the issue addressed, it'll be ignored.
If you refuse to actually deal with the topic and thus take it OFF-topic further, it'll be reported since it is against the rules and rude. Simple as that
How can I be avoiding the situation when I clearly requested clarification? I thought you were not in favor of ad hominems, which, btw, is only a fallacy when an attack of character is used in place of a valid argument.
As long as one repeats the same mantras which were never advocated in the original post - the issue of responding with false scenarios - one has no business asking for clarification. You already noted where you didn't check out the videos - and even outside of the videos, it was noted directly what the issue was. Others noted it as well - and thus, till you can get the issue addressed, it'll be ignored.
If you refuse to actually deal with the topic and thus take it OFF-topic further, it'll be reported since it is against the rules and rude. Simple as that.
How can I be avoiding the situation when I clearly requested clarification? I thought you were not in favor of ad hominems, which, btw, is only a fallacy when an attack of character is used in place of a valid argument.
As long as one repeats the same mantras which were never advocated in the original post - the issue of responding with false scenarios - one has no business asking for clarification. You already noted where you didn't check out the videos - and even outside of the videos, it was noted directly what the issue was. Others noted it as well - and thus, till you can get the issue addressed, it'll be ignored. As it is, ad-hominem already occurred with the silliness of claiming others were "taking it out on Christians" when it came to discussing the issue of violence/gentrification in the World Cup and others claiming Christ who condoned it.
That said, this is the last and only time I'm going to note plainly where one can actually go back/investigate the videos that the OP Issue dealt with. If one does not wish to address that, then it is asked one leave the thread instead of derailing it with arguments not based on what was noted. Moreover, If you refuse to actually deal with the topic and thus take it OFF-topic further, it'll be reported since it is against the rules and rude. Simple as that
Then I will assume that the word salads are nothing very meaningful.
Inconsequential to the OP - but again, it has been noted where one did not deal with the issue.
Quotes or it never happened.
Inconsequential as it is when others in differing discussions were talking to others and people had enough wisdom to keep up with it...and others demanding quotes were ignored since their refusal to read what was said is not the same as evidence of what actually happened. There was already reference to the issue as noted in
#1 (as well as footnotes on showing where to go).
What was noted before:
And in response, your original words on the matter:
I didn't have time to watch the full videos, but I've been around long enough to have a rough idea of where this is going.
Despite what was said when one noted that the OP was centered (in large part) on the actual documentary on the issue, there was little point speaking when one didn't even address the facts...each and every issue dealt with which you predictably brought up in opposition as if it was not noted.
I would say using metaphor that burning down the house is not the right solution for solving a rat problem in the cellar. That is not avoidance. Further I'll add that accusing the residents of supporting the rat problem, for simply taking up residence, would be a fallacious and false accusation.
This is further demonstration as to why it is evident where you have failed to actually deal with what others have said in context and pay attention. For no one said that one had to burn down the house (your words/strawman) when it came to noting where others needed to boycott organizations that are abusing others blantantly. Also, if bent on using the Rat analogy, no one is advocating abuse for residents because of rats in the basement. What is a problem is others choosing to FEED the rats (i.e. leaving cheese in the rooms, not cleaning up or reporting it if seeing one, etc.) and avoid taking responsibility since they are just concerned with the residence.
Avoiding the issue
This is why I asked for a precise statement of the problem you want to say FIFA, or whomever you want to hit with your "supporting evil" spray, is responsible for. So far all I have is: people are poor, people are upset, people were murdered (but by who, I do not know), people are angry and demonstrating, people were forcibly removed from their homes (again, by who and why, I do not know), slavery has occurred, pedophilia exists, and that Christians are supporting all of this through a desire for entertainment through the World Cup.
And as said before, when you choose to make up things as you go along, there's no real need to go along with it
It was never a matter of saying "people are poor" - as that was never stated. To claim such was noted is a falsehood. The same goes for saying it was not stated who was murdering others, as that was noted as well (just as it was noted who removing others from their home ) - both of which are foolish since the bottom line is that FIFA was noted to be funding both cases of gentrification and murder - and again, based on your lack of actually reading the information, one is again making false scenarios.
The videos (which you did not watch) addressed the matter of how to go about that process and what the issues were...as well as what others have done in going about the matter - from boycotting FIFA as other former FIFA Workers/people in Brazil have done (just as it was with Boycotts of the Buses in the South during Jim Crow) to raising awareness of the evils they have done in destroying homes by the construction crews hired by FIFA ...to contacting local senators/those in congress with regards to creating pressures on the business contacts with FIFA that the U.S has so as to make it where they cannot go forward if continuining with the pattern they have had over the year....and of course, the bottom line reality of being a voice for others who have been harmed by the murders done by police who were hired to clear out areas where others live to make room for the stadiums FIFA uses. For reference on those practically addressing the issues and spelling out what the problems are
Dave Zirin on Brazil's Mass Protests Against World Cup Displacement - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LawaXrGU9k
Brazil's Dance with the Devil: World Cup, Olympics, and the Fight for Democracy (w/ Dave Zirin) - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qm-q75Z1NUs
What is being noted specifically as an issue is when revenue is occurring through unjust means in an immense sense (and with FULL knowledge whenever others participate ) and the goal is our entertainment. As it concrerns FIFA this has also been very present with those impacted by what has gone down[/URL] - as evidenced by the worker strikes ..more discussed in
Brazilian Workers Strike and Protest Runup to World Cup and them asking for support rather than avoidance for the sake of the game - and to be clear, these people protesting are also soccer fans who have noted where FIFA had multiple documented cases for the past couple of years where others got harmed.
I did not say that there is no problem.
What was noted was others having lofty expectations and that one didn't want to dilute what Christ did in changes in other times - in addition to defending the system with the "Rat in the basement" analogy of how it'd be wrong to cut off huge revenues for the sake of addressing corrupt activity. The issue of how extensive the corruption was in FIFA and widely-impacting was minimized and the actions defended in the same manner as others defended slavery. It was also assumed people were demonizing soccer - but that's not the point of the OP. In your words:
To cut off huge venues like this for the sake of some corrupt activity that feeds off of it would be like burning down a house because there are rats in the basement, or like destroying the organs of a patient to remove a tumor. Fixing the real problems is so much more difficult than indignation alone can handle, and demoralizing a p
erfectly innocent activity and its participants because someone, somewhere is doing something wrong, doesn't serve anyone but ourselves.
Societies do change though, and considering the bloody murder that used to occupy stadiums like these, or Europe's long history of violent revolution carried out by common folk fighting for survival, I'd not want to be diluting the victories that Christ has won for simply not measuring up to lofty expectations.
If one chooses to defend what FIFA does and what it advocated when it came to soccer, one doesn't value the people who were harmed. One cannot enjoy soccer when it is being used to harm others.
I do not personally feel guilty because 1) I didn't watch the World Cup, 2) I'm not even a soccer fan, and 3) because I am not easily swayed.
If a murder occurs in Chicago, I don't think anyone here is going to be up in arms if it's reported in the newspaper.
If one didn't watch the World Cup, one has no business being in the thread since it was dedicated to those who love the World Cup - both those loving it for what it used to be (as well as loving it for the soccer involved/unity) and those loving it while ignoring the corruption that happens in it. If one didn't even keep up with the World Cup, one has no business trying to speak on the matter to others as to why there are no issues - and it doesn't matter whether one feels guilty or not when others have been murdered by an institution. I don't have any investment in things such as boxing - and I don't feel guilty when a boxer dies. However, when I hear and see where the boxer was murdered by those intentionally funneling illegal finances into the industry and bribing others off, it is a problem if I essentially say "Whatever - it's not my issue and I don't box."
People have been bothered throughout the South when hearing of murders of others in Chicago.
I don't know what you're even talking about.
There were several things where it was evident that there was a lack of understanding ton the matter - but again, if that cannot be understood even after explaining, then that's a problem,.
Then I appreciate your consent.
OK
Who is avoiding that and how should it be approached?
Already noted - as you avoided it earlier. But again, we're done so long as the avoidance occurs.