2015 Feb 9, 7:43am
491,640 views 531 comments
We can't ban offensive speech because then we'd be at the mercy of the most easily offended; the lowest common denominator, and wouldn't be able to discuss jack shit.
There are many ideas that we will never agree on. The left and the right have different ways of approaching governance, based on contrasting philosophies. But many of the ultimate goals — economic prosperity, better health care and education, etc. — are the same. We just don’t share the same vision of how to achieve them.How, then, do we live together in this world of differing ideas? For starters, let’s agree that the ideas are fair game. If you think my idea is awful, you should say as much. But there is a difference between attacking an idea and attacking the person behind that idea. Labeling someone as an “-ist” who believes in an “-ism” because of the person’s policy preference is just a shortcut to playground-style name-calling, cloaked in political terminology. It’s also generally a good indication that the attacker doesn’t have a solid argument and needs a way to end debate before it has even begun.Similarly, people too often attack not just an idea but also the supposed intent behind an idea. That raises the emotional level of the debate and might seem like it strengthens the attacker’s side, but it’s a terrible way to make a point. Assuming the worst about your opponents’ intentions has the effect of demonizing their ideas, removing the need for sound counter-reasoning and fact-based argument. That’s not a good environment for the exchange of ideas.
« First « Previous Comments 492 - 531 of 531 Last »
When I was a kid every liberal HATED this song. But every liberal supported Axl’s right to write and sing it.Not one “liberal” today would be ok with it. The left would literally lose their shit over this song, boycott and protest the band and their record company...
That's exactly what I'm talking about.
On the 'Freedom to offend' website, you will get censored for typing out "That's exactly what I'm talking about".You can't make this stuff up. Brother Patrick, I implore you to reconsider your policies.
You deleted a single post that read merely "That's exactly what I'm talking about."
Another screen name the DNC lets out of the box every six months.
I have not even perused your small part of the web for many months
It's just a shame considering what you had before.
Clearly you are happy with the result.
Bring facts to the debate
expressing a sincerely held point of view with good will
WookieMan saysWhat was so good about that past that you'd want to come back again? Have I not answered that question in spades?
What was so good about that past that you'd want to come back again?
However it is much harder to argue with my list of real tangible results. Is this not the case?
Like they’re obese and have iPhones, right.
Although you tried to sabotage my list of facts, they remain facts.
DoofusRicky saysYou deleted a single post that read merely "That's exactly what I'm talking about."One of the rules is not to insult the site itself. Making up false claims about the site is insulting it.Please come up with a comment of yours that was flagged, but is not actually insulting the site or another user. If it was flagged by someone by mistake, I can undo that.Note that flagged comments can be edited by you, thus you can see what they say by clicking "edit".DoofusRicky saysAnother screen name the DNC lets out of the box every six months.You could flag that. I just want people to discuss issues and not each other or the site.
Patrick saysexpressing a sincerely held point of view with good willHow can we get more of that?
Content that is so great, you got to repeat it incessantly.
Deleting DoofusRicky for insulting the site over and over instead of debating issues with good will like almost everyone else here.Sick of it.
Hilarious how? He was just FUCKING TROLLING YOU and you kept responding to him like he was engaging seriously.
Disagree. I'm almost positive it was an old user changing his writing style. Not that it's still not trolling I suppose, but there was another motive, likely childish. If there was a way to prove it, I'd bet good money on who it was, but I don't think that's possible. I also shouldn't be talking about other users. Needless to say the whole "meetup" topic was a dead give away. He wanted the attention like he always has.
WookieMan saysDisagree. I'm almost positive it was an old user changing his writing style. Not that it's still not trolling I suppose, but there was another motive, likely childish. If there was a way to prove it, I'd bet good money on who it was, but I don't think that's possible. I also shouldn't be talking about other users. Needless to say the whole "meetup" topic was a dead give away. He wanted the attention like he always has.Ummm...every word you just wrote after 'Disagree' SUPPORTS my entire contention, actually.
Just mocking idiocracy when I see it.
Onvacation saysJust mocking idiocracy when I see it.No, you are heckling commenters who say things outside the alt right bubble. —not in any way related to government and whether or not it is idiotic.As if you speak for the real world. You don’t. Too many of you men are taken by right wing populist alternative facts, (lies) fantasies and conspiracies.And that is virtue signaling to your brotherhood, all victims of the poor, the immigrants, the races and women. You sandbag personal comments using “we” to feign authority.All marching to make the rich richer come what may.
Too many of you men are taken by right wing populist alternative facts
« First « Previous Comments 492 - 531 of 531 Last »