Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 95
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    College Park, GA
    Posts
    4,749
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmp View Post
    Rule #2 for Liberals: When your argument REALLY goes into a downward spiral, ridicule people!
    Whatever. You're ignoring my argument.

    Your argument is based completely on ideology and is not realistic. Your argument is based on "if only." If only people just wouldn't have sex, they wouldn't have unwanted pregnancy, disease, etc. Wow. If only people just wouldn't swim, there would never be any drownings. If only people people just wouldn't break the law, there would be no crime!

    Well, people DO have sex, they always have had sex and they will continue to have sex long after we're all dead and gone. My argument uses reality, i.e. facts like "people do have sex" and treats them accordingly with reality-based solutions like *drumroll please* birth control options.
    Last edited by Hagbard Celine; 05-11-2007 at 10:10 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaffer
    Science wants to explain things and understand why they happen. Creationists want to use science to justify their own causes.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    In my knickers
    Posts
    31,029
    Thanks (Given)
    13927
    Thanks (Received)
    15358
    Likes (Given)
    4384
    Likes (Received)
    5487
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475357

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zefrendylia View Post
    This is an inspiring autobiography of a Russian-Jewish son of an immigrant who grew up in the ghettos, served as a bombadier in WWII, became an influential activist in the civil rights and Vietnam War era, became a world renowned professor and changed the face of American history with his first book A People's History of the United States.

    From Howard Zinn's You Can't Remain Neutral on a Moving Train p.165:

    "[talking about growing up in the Brooklyn ghettos and his father's constant struggle to earn a living]

    All his life he worked hard for very little. I've always resented the smug statements of politicians, media commentators, corporate executives who talk of how, in America, if you worked hard you would become rich. The meaning of that was if you were poor it was because you hadn't worked hard enough. I knew this was a lie, about my father and millions of others, men and women who worked harder than anyone, harder than financiers and politicians, harder than anybody if you accept that when you work at an unpleasant job that makes it very hard work indeed."



    Sadly, though my parents worked hard, succeeded and I was fortunate enough to grow up in the middle class--I agree with Zinn. I understand that there will always be people who abuse the system. But just like the poor and disadvantaged, there are wealthy and influential corporate fat cats who cheat the system on a daily basis. Yet those who "despise" the poor never seem to treat the rich the same way. When I say "despise," I mean exactly as Zinn says. It seems as though the poor are blamed for making that "choice" in life. It seems as though the poor in our society are somehow not really that poor. It seems as though the poor are blamed for the very situation they are in and struggling to get out of. And it's the poor and their advocates that take money out of my paycheck!

    Why these beliefs? Simply because people don't want to pay taxes. They don't like someone telling them how to use their "hard-earned" money; they want more for their own use. Somehow giving a little to uplift all of society is evil because its liberal, Democratic, progressive, or socialist. To me, it reeks of greed. Guess what Americans: if you don't like it, get politically involved and lets push for a more direct democracy. Until this happens, I somehow doubt that without force, every beggar on the street would receive $5 from you every time you pass by.

    When I asked an admitted "conservative," Why should a CEO earn a billion dollars a year and his janitor $5 an hour, he replied: because he can. To look at the true richness of a society all you need to do is look at how the poorest person lives. I don't mean to pidgeonhole all conservatives, right-wingers or Republicans because indeed there are some in those groups who would agree. Of course they then would be labeled by their fellow ideologues as "not really conservative."

    This idea that the poor drain our tax dollars is absolutely untrue. Somehow, spending tax dollars on education, healthcare, and poverty is a waste--yet, outspending all other nations combined on defense contractors is a-ok. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar..._United_States as is spending more than any other domestice budget item http://www.cdi.org/issues/discret.html. Meanwhile, China spends a tenth of our budget on electronic countermeasures to our high-tech, high dollar offensive weapons.

    Abandoning the poor in our society because we believe it is their "choice" is equivalent to abandoning a family member in need. Bottomline: most of us would never do it. Now if you had to continually bail that family member out, understandably you would have to draw the line. The same is true for any social welfare program. But the mentality that the majority of the poor truly need the help must be there first. Everyone makes mistakes in life. Just because you have been fairly fortunate, predicted the right paths, and picked the right choices doesn't mean misfortune can befall you at any moment. To deny those who have fallen short in life is not Christian nor is it American.
    I disagree with Zinn that the message is if you work hard, you will be rich. The message I've always heard was if you work hard, you can have a decent life in this country. And unlike in many other countries, you can. Why do you think so many want to immigrate here- because it's so awful? And if you don't like the message that we should aspire to being rich, blame the media, not the rich. The media are the ones glorifying Paris Hilton, all of Hollyweird's gated homes, and the latest rapper's million dollar crib, etc.

    But working hard isn't enough. You have to make smart choices, too. I'm not sure what you mean by "mistakes", but I say, don't have kids before you can afford them. Don't spend on extravagences until you have your bills paid and are at least saving for a home. Don't drop out of school. And don't let drugs or alcohol control your life. For starters. Failure to live by these simple rules is not a "mistake". It's choice.

    I also disgree with this sentence: "Somehow giving a little to uplift all of society is evil because its liberal, Democratic, progressive, or socialist". How that trivializes what others do! We who work our whole lives give way more than a "little bit". Have you looked at the taxes taken from your paycheck? And that does not include all the money we give to charity through our churches and elsewhere. And volunteer work. If all those nasty rich people you disdain suddenly stopped giving, believe me, you would notice it. (Btw, there is a thread here somewhere with a study that shows Republicans outgive Dems in charitable giving).

    Finally, without a strong defense, we will have much more to worry about than a class struggle.
    After the game, the king and the pawn go into the same box - Author unknown

    “Unfortunately, the truth is now whatever the media say it is”
    -Abbey

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,759
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hagbard Celine View Post
    Whatever. You're ignoring my argument.
    No - the argument is the flawed assumption Condoms prevent 99% of sperm cells from entering the uterus.

    Your argument is based completely on ideology and is not realistic.
    That's your assumption.

    Your argument is based on "if only." If only people just wouldn't have sex, they wouldn't have unwanted pregnancy, disease, etc.
    But that's absolute true. It's a truism. If people wouldn't have sex outside of marriage, STDs and unwanted pregnancy rates would drop through the floor.

    Wow. If only people just wouldn't swim, there would never be any drownings. If only people people just wouldn't break the law, there would be no crime!
    Again!

    Well, people DO have sex, they always have had sex and they will continue to have sex long after we're all dead and gone. My argument uses reality, i.e. facts like "people do have sex" and treats them accordingly with reality-based solutions like *drumroll please* birth control options.
    ...what is the most effective form of birth control? *drumroll* ABSTINENCE!

    IF we'd stop perpetuating myths like "safe sex"...and IF we'd instill higher moral standards....and IF we, as a society would stop glorifying and pushing SEX upon the hearts and minds of our young people...we'd GET the desired result. MORE families. FEWER STDs. FEWER Abortions. FEWER ruined lives.
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    College Park, GA
    Posts
    4,749
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Abbey View Post
    I disagree with Zinn that the message is if you work hard, you will be rich. The message I've always heard was if you work hard, you can have a decent life in this country. And unlike in many other countries, you can. Why do you think so many want to immigrate here- because it's so awful? And if you don't like the message that we should aspire to being rich, blame the media, not the rich. The media are the ones glorifying Paris Hilton, all of Hollyweird's gated homes, and the latest rapper's million dollar crib, etc.

    But working hard isn't enough. You have to make smart choices, too. I'm not sure what you mean by "mistakes", but I say, don't have kids before you can afford them. Don't spend on extravagences until you have your bills paid and are at least saving for a home. Don't drop out of school. And don't let drugs or alcohol control your life. For starters. Failure to live by these simple rules is not a "mistake". It's choice.

    I also disgree with this sentence: "Somehow giving a little to uplift all of society is evil because its liberal, Democratic, progressive, or socialist". How that trivializes what others do! We who work our whole lives give way more than a "little bit". Have you looked at the taxes taken from your paycheck? And that does not include all the money we give to charity through our churches and elsewhere. And volunteer work. If all those nasty rich people you disdain suddenly stopped giving, believe me, you would notice it. (Btw, there is a thread here somewhere with a study that shows Republicans outgive Dems in charitable giving).

    Finally, without a strong defense, we will have much more to worry about than a class struggle.
    The evil "media" report on Paris Hilton BECAUSE you/we watch it. If we didn't, they'd report something we would watch. Blaming the "media" for all of society's ills is a mistake. Ha--The Koran says "Allah will not begin to change a people until they change themselves." I think that's applicable here.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaffer
    Science wants to explain things and understand why they happen. Creationists want to use science to justify their own causes.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,759
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Abbey View Post
    I disagree with Zinn that the message is if you work hard, you will be rich. The message I've always heard was if you work hard, you can have a decent life in this country. And unlike in many other countries, you can. Why do you think so many want to immigrate here- because it's so awful? And if you don't like the message that we should aspire to being rich, blame the media, not the rich. The media are the ones glorifying Paris Hilton, all of Hollyweird's gated homes, and the latest rapper's million dollar crib, etc.

    But working hard isn't enough. You have to make smart choices, too. I'm not sure what you mean by "mistakes", but I say, don't have kids before you can afford them. Don't spend on extravagences until you have your bills paid and are at least saving for a home. Don't drop out of school. And don't let drugs or alcohol control your life. For starters. Failure to live by these simple rules is not a "mistake". It's choice.

    I also disgree with this sentence: "Somehow giving a little to uplift all of society is evil because its liberal, Democratic, progressive, or socialist". How that trivializes what others do! We who work our whole lives give way more than a "little bit". Have you looked at the taxes taken from your paycheck? And that does not include all the money we give to charity through our churches and elsewhere. And volunteer work. If all those nasty rich people you disdain suddenly stopped giving, believe me, you would notice it. (Btw, there is a thread here somewhere with a study that shows Republicans outgive Dems in charitable giving).

    Finally, without a strong defense, we will have much more to worry about than a class struggle.

    Well stated, Abbey. In addition to not allowing Alcohol or other drugs to control people; People let SEX and desire for same control them, too.

    Did I remember reading something about Conservatives generally giving MORE to charities than Libs? I'll have to see if I can dig that up.

    For the record - one time I gave a street guy $20. He was sitting on the sidewalk with a sign which read: "Aspiring Porn Star - needs money for Penis-implant!"

    I laughed, and dropped the bill in his pan.
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    In my knickers
    Posts
    31,029
    Thanks (Given)
    13927
    Thanks (Received)
    15358
    Likes (Given)
    4384
    Likes (Received)
    5487
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475357

    Default

    Yes, people always had and always will have pre-marital sex and pregnancies will occur. Roughly what percentage do you think did so in, say, the 40's, compared to today?
    After the game, the king and the pawn go into the same box - Author unknown

    “Unfortunately, the truth is now whatever the media say it is”
    -Abbey

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    In my knickers
    Posts
    31,029
    Thanks (Given)
    13927
    Thanks (Received)
    15358
    Likes (Given)
    4384
    Likes (Received)
    5487
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475357

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hagbard Celine View Post
    The evil "media" report on Paris Hilton BECAUSE you/we watch it. If we didn't, they'd report something we would watch. Blaming the "media" for all of society's ills is a mistake. Ha--The Koran says "Allah will not begin to change a people until they change themselves." I think that's applicable here.
    Chikcen/egg. If it wasn't reported, who would watch it? If I didn't put Cheerios on the breakfast table for my daughter since she was a baby, would she eat still eat it?
    After the game, the king and the pawn go into the same box - Author unknown

    “Unfortunately, the truth is now whatever the media say it is”
    -Abbey

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    College Park, GA
    Posts
    4,749
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmp View Post
    No - the argument is the flawed assumption Condoms prevent 99% of sperm cells from entering the uterus.
    Actually what I said was: "Dude, condoms are 99 percent effective at stopping sperm cells from entering the uterus."

    If a condom has a hole in it, obviously it's not going to stop 99 percent of anything. I meant condom use. It says so right on the box. Maybe I should've specified. I guess I should know that I have to on this board else my posts will be picked apart word by word in a semantics free for all.

    Quote Originally Posted by dmp
    IF we'd stop perpetuating myths like "safe sex"...and IF we'd instill higher moral standards....and IF we, as a society would stop glorifying and pushing SEX upon the hearts and minds of our young people...we'd GET the desired result. MORE families. FEWER STDs. FEWER Abortions. FEWER ruined lives.
    I'll buy that. My point is that this idealistic vision of society won't happen. It never has either. The reason is human nature. Even in Muslim society people have sex outside of marriage and I'm pretty sure it's punishable by death or something equally horrifying. Imagining or hoping that human beings are better "moral" creatures than they really are isn't realistic in my opinion. I still think two lines of defense (moral ideology AND contraceptive use) is a more realistic plan.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaffer
    Science wants to explain things and understand why they happen. Creationists want to use science to justify their own causes.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    College Park, GA
    Posts
    4,749
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Abbey View Post
    Yes, people always had and always will have pre-marital sex and pregnancies will occur. Roughly what percentage do you think did so in, say, the 40's, compared to today?
    I'd say it was roughly the same adjusted, of course, for population growth. Why?
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaffer
    Science wants to explain things and understand why they happen. Creationists want to use science to justify their own causes.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,759
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hagbard Celine View Post
    Actually what I said was: "Dude, condoms are 99 percent effective at stopping sperm cells from entering the uterus."

    If a condom has a hole in it, obviously it's not going to stop 99 percent of anything. I meant condom use. It says so right on the box. Maybe I should've specified. I guess I should know that I have to on this board else my posts will be picked apart word by word in a semantics free for all.

    What's more important - stopping sperm from entering the uterus, or preventing pregnancy?
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    In my knickers
    Posts
    31,029
    Thanks (Given)
    13927
    Thanks (Received)
    15358
    Likes (Given)
    4384
    Likes (Received)
    5487
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475357

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hagbard Celine View Post
    I'd say it was roughly the same adjusted, of course, for population growth. Why?
    I don't know the answer, but I suspect that there were many fewer pregnancies per capita, based on the exponential increase in unwed motherhood I've seen over the last few decades. There was a time when they seemd to be fairly rare. Today, not so. I chose a decade when abortion wasn't legal, to leave that out of the equation.

    It's an interesting but probably unprovable theory, that when teenage sex was more taboo, when we didn't look at it as an inevitable behavior, and when sexually active girls were looked at, well, negatively, there was less of it going on.
    After the game, the king and the pawn go into the same box - Author unknown

    “Unfortunately, the truth is now whatever the media say it is”
    -Abbey

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    College Park, GA
    Posts
    4,749
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Abbey View Post
    Chikcen/egg. If it wasn't reported, who would watch it? If I didn't put Cheerios on the breakfast table for my daughter since she was a baby, would she eat still eat it?
    Your daughter is dependent on you for food, so she's going to eat whatever you put in front of her or she's going to starve. I think that's a bad analogy. The networks are driven by money and are dependent on US to supply them an audience for their advertisers. So the analogy you made should actually be flipped around. YOU are the viewer and your daughter is the "media." If you give your daughter cheerios (an audience for Paris Hilton stories), which she likes, to eat because you know she will eat them, of course she will eat them. But if you give your daughter raisin bran (an audience for actual in depth coverage of issues) or some other healthy cereal, she might not eat it. Your daughter isn't going to choose bran flakes over her cheerios is she? So to make things easy on yourself, you give her what she likes.

    I don't think it's a chicken/egg scenario. I know for sure that if ratings fell for Paris Hilton coverage, i.e. people stopped watching, networks would change their programming to something people WOULD watch. The reason we see so much celebrity gossip and other trivial crap on our "news" networks is because the networks have found that they get higher ratings by showing the stuff.
    Last edited by Hagbard Celine; 05-11-2007 at 10:49 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaffer
    Science wants to explain things and understand why they happen. Creationists want to use science to justify their own causes.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    College Park, GA
    Posts
    4,749
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Abbey View Post
    I don't know the answer, but I suspect that there were many fewer pregnancies per capita, based on the exponential increase in unwed motherhood I've seen over the last few decades. There was a time when they seemd to be fairly rare. Today, not so. I chose a decade when abortion wasn't legal, to leave that out of the equation.

    It's an interesting but probably unprovable theory, that when teenage sex was more taboo, when we didn't look at it as an inevitable behavior, and when sexually active girls were looked at, well, negatively, there was less of it going on.
    Here's some info on it. Seems teen pregnancy rates have declined since the 1950s but the rate of unmarital teen pregnancy rates have increased since then. Also interestingly, the number of US teen pregnancies has dropped more slowly than other western nations since the 1950s.

    http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/05/1/gr050107.html
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaffer
    Science wants to explain things and understand why they happen. Creationists want to use science to justify their own causes.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    In my knickers
    Posts
    31,029
    Thanks (Given)
    13927
    Thanks (Received)
    15358
    Likes (Given)
    4384
    Likes (Received)
    5487
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475357

    Default

    Yes, there is an audience for celebrity gossip, I haven't denied that. We just disagree on why there is one. If Paris is mentioned on a news program, I am not going to tune out just because they have 2 minutes of Paris on. The point is, if the lifestyles and foibles of the rich and famous weren't proffered, we wouldn't know enough to want to see it.

    As for the Cheerios, you have it backwards. I am the provider of the cereal, just as the networks are the providers of the gossip. My daughter is literally, the consumer. If she is steadily given Cheerios when her tastes are forming, she is going to eat it because it's all she knows to eat. By the time she discovers that Raisin Bran exists, she is hooked on Cheerios. However, if I then take the Cherrios away, and tell her that they are no longer available, she will eventually get used to Raisin Bran, and may even like it better.

    Take the Paris-level garbage completely out of the media, and the interest level will die a slow death. No one was clamoring for reality TV, but now that it is here, it is a national obsession. The latest is goofy prime time game shows. None of these things were demanded, and we lived just fine without them, but now that the are here, we watch. It's not that telling.
    Last edited by Abbey Marie; 05-11-2007 at 11:01 AM.
    After the game, the king and the pawn go into the same box - Author unknown

    “Unfortunately, the truth is now whatever the media say it is”
    -Abbey

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    In my knickers
    Posts
    31,029
    Thanks (Given)
    13927
    Thanks (Received)
    15358
    Likes (Given)
    4384
    Likes (Received)
    5487
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475357

    Default

    What the heck?!

    After the game, the king and the pawn go into the same box - Author unknown

    “Unfortunately, the truth is now whatever the media say it is”
    -Abbey

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums