|
|
Post by The Captain on Sept 25, 2015 10:23:07 GMT -5
Or on bananas, sir. Or on bananas. Sadly bananas are one of the evils that the SPLC hasn't spoken out against. <sigh> On the subject of you vs. bananas:
Also people should consider that occasionally, in some matters, they could be the one that's wrong.
 |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Sept 25, 2015 10:35:07 GMT -5
I side with Sinclair on that one : friggin hate 'em bananas!
|
|
|
|
Post by the4thpip on Sept 25, 2015 13:27:41 GMT -5
I disagree with the idea that all opinions and beliefs need to be respected. I think it's more fair to say that all people should be respected. Their beliefs should be confronted and challenged; not ridiculed. But doesn't that kind of thinking lead to giving "equal time" to flat earthers, chem trailers and vaccine doubters? When you don't ridicule the ridiculous, you validate it and lead people to consider things they should never, ever consider. |
|
|
|
Post by the4thpip on Sept 25, 2015 13:30:33 GMT -5
To me respect is earned. Someone who I do not consider to be a decent human being has not earned that. Wow. Implying that someone is not a decent human being for holding views you don't respect is pretty much the most monstrously offensive thing anyone has yet said in this thread (let alone in this community), and yet I still respect you, even while I find that opinion horrifying. I don't read it that way. If somebody proves themselves to be a monstrous human being (for example by denying others their rights out of bigotry, by denying health insurance to the sick etc), then he does not respect them and their opinions. And I would second that motion. But of course there are decent people who disagree with me, and I respect them. |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Sept 25, 2015 13:57:53 GMT -5
I think there's a happy medium where you can be nice to people while point out they are stupid  In other news, John Boehner? It'll be really interesting to see how this plays out. I think the tea party is going to try some sort of coup, I'm just not sure what exactly yet. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2015 14:12:48 GMT -5
When Boehner is pushed out because he's too moderate, if not indeed *gasp* liberal, for the controlling faction in the House ... oy. Maybe the teabagger element just got tired of endless photos of the orange guy tearing up at the drop of a hat. (Get that walking piece of citrus some kind of really powerful mood stabilizer, stat.)
Admittedly, I'm selfish. My main concern is what impact this has on the likelihood of a government shutdown, because a government shutdown means I don't get paid in the interim, as I & my co-workers experienced two years ago.
Which is sort of important to me & means I'm even less likely to join in the endless choruses of Kumbaya that apparently are supposed to sung in the background during all political discourse.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Sept 25, 2015 14:54:06 GMT -5
I think it's more fair to say that all people should be respected. Their beliefs should be confronted and challenged; not ridiculed. But doesn't that kind of thinking lead to giving "equal time" to flat earthers, chem trailers and vaccine doubters? When you don't ridicule the ridiculous, you validate it and lead people to consider things they should never, ever consider. So we should silence anyone who's opinions we don't agree with? Sounds like fascism. And we don't like when Fox "News" does that, so is it only okay when our side is the judge of what gets air time and what does not? |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Sept 25, 2015 14:57:03 GMT -5
I heard on the radio this morning that Boehner's announcement makes a shutdown less likely, because the Teaheads consider this a victory, and will start focusing on the succession and will not feel the need to shut things down since they already won.
On another note, we have Christopher Christie who's known as "Chris", and Michael Huckabee who's known as "Mike", and John Bush who's known as "Jeb", and Rafael Cruz who's known as "Ted". So why does it feel so weird to refer to the frontrunner as "Don Trump"?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2015 15:04:23 GMT -5
But doesn't that kind of thinking lead to giving "equal time" to flat earthers, chem trailers and vaccine doubters? When you don't ridicule the ridiculous, you validate it and lead people to consider things they should never, ever consider. So we should silence anyone who's opinions we don't agree with? Sounds like fascism. And we don't like when Fox "News" does that, so is it only okay when our side is the judge of what gets air time and what does not? At some point, inherently fascistic as it might sound, certain standards have to be applied, surely. Or are you saying that, yes, the Flat Earthers do warrant front-page or prime-time presentation of their beliefs? What about neo-Nazis*? Should medical journals be inviting, say, Jenny McCarthy to write for them, & if they don't, are they being fascist? Because it seems to me that if we don't exercise some sort of standards for, well, basic intelligence & reasonableness, then we might as well pretend everything is equal & nothing matters so long as equal treatment is administered. If Joe Blow repeatedly asserts falsehoods & for that matter peppers his presentations with misspellings, bad grammar & obscenities, guess what? I'm not likely to publish it on my website. Is that fascism? *Not that any exist, according to the former executive editor of my newspaper in Little Rock; we were forbidden from using the term & had to edit it out of wire stories. Same thing with racism & racists -- no such thing. He was an idi- ... uh, that is, he was a guy who had questionable opinions**, but our paper was sure as hell polite & respectful toward people on the extreme right. **Of course, the worst was his position that all executions should go on 3B, because they were merely the logical conclusion of the judicial process. As night editor for most of the '90s, after Arkansas got back into the prison execution business, a lot of that happened on my watch. In the mid-'90s, when Arkansas carried out the nation's first triple execution since something like 1947, it was such a big deal everywhere else that I wound up giving a telephone interview to a radio station in Australia. But in the statewide daily paper in whose back door it happened? Yep -- 3B. |
|
|
|
Post by the4thpip on Sept 25, 2015 15:14:08 GMT -5
But doesn't that kind of thinking lead to giving "equal time" to flat earthers, chem trailers and vaccine doubters? When you don't ridicule the ridiculous, you validate it and lead people to consider things they should never, ever consider. So we should silence anyone who's opinions we don't agree with? Sounds like fascism. And we don't like when Fox "News" does that, so is it only okay when our side is the judge of what gets air time and what does not? You know, you're bending over backwards to distort what we're saying here. What I'm saying is that that urge some moderates and some on the left have to be respectful at all times and not "stoop to their level" is not working in American politics. It's what cost Gore and Kerry the elections. They allowed the GOP to paint them as caricatures of themselves and the supposed "liberal media" played right along. And frankly, I think Obama might have lost to Romney if Mittens hadn't gotten broken beyond repair as a candidate once Gingrich was done with him. It took Republicans to beat the Republican candidate, because Democrats lack the ferociousness it sadly seems to take. |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Sept 25, 2015 15:32:22 GMT -5
I think it's more fair to say that all people should be respected. Their beliefs should be confronted and challenged; not ridiculed. But doesn't that kind of thinking lead to giving "equal time" to flat earthers, chem trailers and vaccine doubters? When you don't ridicule the ridiculous, you validate it and lead people to consider things they should never, ever consider. I don't see that as leading to equal time at all. You can illustrate that someone is wrong with something more powerful and effective than insults, derision, and ridicule. You can use facts. If they continue with ridiculous arguments against proven facts, then they've accomplished the ridicule themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2015 15:38:23 GMT -5
But doesn't that kind of thinking lead to giving "equal time" to flat earthers, chem trailers and vaccine doubters? When you don't ridicule the ridiculous, you validate it and lead people to consider things they should never, ever consider. I don't see that as leading to equal time at all. You can illustrate that someone is wrong with something more powerful and effective than insults, derision, and ridicule. You can use facts. If they continue with ridiculous arguments against proven facts, then they've accomplished the ridicule themselves. Who's to say their arguments are "ridiculous," & that your "facts" are "proven"? You're exercising precisely the sort of judgments that 4thpip is being accused of, you fascist. |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Sept 25, 2015 15:49:53 GMT -5
I don't see that as leading to equal time at all. You can illustrate that someone is wrong with something more powerful and effective than insults, derision, and ridicule. You can use facts. If they continue with ridiculous arguments against proven facts, then they've accomplished the ridicule themselves. Who's to say their arguments are "ridiculous," & that your "facts" are "proven"? You're exercising precisely the sort of judgments that 4thpip is being accused of, you fascist. Fascism (& humor) aside, clearly some things can be empirically proven. "Flat earthers"? Show them a picture of Earth from space. "Vaccine doubters"? The only "study" that had showed any "evidence" of vaccines causing autism was discredited by the entire medical community
Also I never said I had a problem with Pip's judgments, just his contention that insults and ridicule were a proper response.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2015 15:54:42 GMT -5
Who's to say their arguments are "ridiculous," & that your "facts" are "proven"? You're exercising precisely the sort of judgments that 4thpip is being accused of, you fascist. Fascism (& humor) aside, clearly some things can be empirically proven. "Flat earthers"? Show them a picture of Earth from space. "Vaccine doubters"? The only "study" that had showed any "evidence" of vaccines causing autism was discredited by the entire medical community
Also I never said I had a problem with Pip's judgments, just his contention that insults and ridicule were a proper response.
I haven't read up on the Flat Earth Society folks in awhile, but the last I looked they were still out there, pictures of Earth from space be damned. And the vaccine doubters are just as strong in their (dis)beliefs. I hate to say it, truly I do, but some ideas are just self-evidently ... ummm ... "interesting." And so are some people. |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Sept 25, 2015 16:00:49 GMT -5
Fascism (& humor) aside, clearly some things can be empirically proven. "Flat earthers"? Show them a picture of Earth from space. "Vaccine doubters"? The only "study" that had showed any "evidence" of vaccines causing autism was discredited by the entire medical community
Also I never said I had a problem with Pip's judgments, just his contention that insults and ridicule were a proper response.
I haven't read up on the Flat Earth Society folks in awhile, but the last I looked they were still out there, pictures of Earth from space be damned. And the vaccine doubters are just as strong in their (dis)beliefs. I hate to say it, truly I do, but some ideas are just self-evidently ... ummm ... "interesting." And so are some people. Agreed, they are still out there and looney as ever. But when they try to dispute obvious proof, they accomplish the job of ridicule by themselves, saving rational people from looking bad doing it.
So I'm not saying these people don't have non-standard views of reality, I'm just saying we can let them hang themselves with their own nonsense and keep our hands clean in the process.
|
|
