My basic problem with YOU.

[billc]

Sure, we won't know who was right till we die. But my "opinion" keeps an innocent human alive, and with a future.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

Again, it's your assertion that your opinion is fact that's sort of the point of this thread. On what do you base your positioning of the dividing line? Specifically, what data?

 

[yorkshirelad]

Again, it's your assertion that your opinion is fact that's sort of the point of this thread. On what do you base your positioning of the dividing line? Specifically, what data?

So you agree, that we don't know! If that is the case, shouldn't we air on the side of caution?
If you were told that there may, or may not be a human being behind your paper target at the shooting range, would you shoot?

 

[Cryozombie]

Am I understanding you correctly, Cryo? It's not the fact that laws get passed you don't agree with, since that's just part of living in a society with rule of law...

...it's the smug assumption by those who disagree with you that you're somehow flawed for having a different opinion?

I'm right there with you. And those assumptions are on both sides of the fence. Young Billi has made it clear in this thread that he thinks I'm a baby killer because I don't believe life begins at conception. And my bleeding-heart liberal sister thinks I'm a nazi for supporting the death penalty.

This is a big part of it but also not the whole of it.

Id use the example of Abortion but that's already rampant in this thread, so lets go to... Feeding the Homeless.

Lets say I am rampantly against feeding the homeless, I think that they should be taught to fish rather than given fish.
You are all for giving them food, since they obviously cannot provide their own.

My point of view does not stop you from providing them fish. However, if you work to mandate that a portion of our taxes goes to do so... Now you have forced me to do something against my will. You have effectivley forced me to bow down to your way of thinking. You can't make me agree, but you can make me obey.

That is the second part of what I mean.

 

[yorkshirelad]

My point of view does not stop you from providing them fish. However, if you work to mandate that a portion of our taxes goes to do so... Now you have forced me to do something against my will. You have effectivley forced me to bow down to your way of thinking. You can't make me agree, but you can make me obey.

That is the second part of what I mean.

Can't the same be said about anything though? I might be a Code Pink memebr who doesn't want any Federal funds going towards military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. I might just want National Guard troops funded to protect the States.

I understand what you're saying and I agree with your sentiments. I just want to know where we should draw the line.

 

[Bruno@MT]

That's just because no one would have it with me when I was underage... I had a couple teachers I tried for tho...

A local girl (college student, fairly hot) auctioned off her virginity via a high class escort bureau. Earned her 50KEuro. She wasn't particularly attached to it, and figured she might as well use it to put her through college.

When I was that age I wanted to give it away for fee but found no takers

Anyway, I know that the US is pretty uptight about prostitution, but it is a bit weird. Give a girl enough money on a weekly basis so that she becomes your personal prostitute, and everything is hunky dory. Some people even admire / envy you (Hugh Hefner, Charlie Sheen). Or if it is more casual, let her shop on your credit card or give her expensive gifts, and people will still not be bothered. Marry her as a trophy wife (sex for status) and that's fine too. But pay per hour and suddenly it warrants the stigma of sex offender, and jail time?

As long as both parties enter the agreement voluntarily (whether for an hour or a week) I don't think it should matter.
So why are so many people who are otherwise pro-freedom and anti government meddling, so against an activity borne from the same freedom?

 

[Cryozombie]

Can't the same be said about anything though? I might be a Code Pink memebr who doesn't want any Federal funds going towards military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. I might just want National Guard troops funded to protect the States.

I understand what you're saying and I agree with your sentiments. I just want to know where we should draw the line.

You make a good point, and it IS difficult to decide that. My opinion is that the decison has to come from where the enforcing of your viewpoint (or mine, or anyone elses) does not force someone else to act on your opinion, Unless they want it to. Laws against things like Abortion, for example are fairly easy to see the sides on, whereas the use of tax dollars is more of a grey area and difficult to do that with.

 

[MA-Caver]

In no way is Abortion , paying higher taxes, going to war with another country or spitting on your neighbor's lawn the issue here... they're not even the question(s).

From what I got from Cryo's OP was everyone has a view point on almost EVERYTHING. Problem is when said viewpoint infringes upon your own (opposing) viewpoint and you have to abide by it.

Our society (presently) is supposedly made up of laws decided by a majority of similar views/opinions. What is right what is wrong. However as of late it seems that many laws (today) are written because of the minority view-points/opinions. I say minority/majority by meaning the NUMBERS of people not their race/creed/sex/whatever. Supposedly in a democracy the majority rules. Someone has an idea and a lot (not a few) people agree (generally) with it and it gets voted on and passed into law and you have to abide by it because it's the law of the land and you'll have to suffer whatever consequences determined (again by the majority) suitable if you break said law, be it jail, fines, or whatever the MAJORITY decides.

But lately it seems that the minority is taking the upper hand because of clever legal-speak that convinces a judge/panel that the minority should have as much rights as the majority does. Gay marriage for example. Gays are still in the minority of this country (as to NUMBERS there of). Yet they fought and won their right to have their marriage union legalized, in spite of a majority saying/voting no.

What I see is simply in matters where things of law to protect the minority numbers is a matter of impatience and stubborn-ness that the minority opinions aren't growing fast enough to become the majority opinion. Remember that it was illegal for women and blacks to vote in this country. Yet times changed and now it's of the majority opinion that it's OK.
"He who's opinion is changed against his will is of the same opinion still." goes a quote I recall reading years ago (probably Twain or Longfellow or somebody like that).
I can be pretty stubborn about how I see things but I do listen and weigh the other side against mine and search the logic in theirs and compare it to mine and I may change it or... I may not. It depends. How quickly it all happens depends upon a lot of other things too.

If we are to continue having a democracy then we need to ensure that those who are of the minority opinion need to find better ways to convince the majority of their view-point(s). Otherwise build a bridge (get over it) and go with the majority.

On a personal one to one level... if I encounter someone who opinion differs from mine... I try to weigh just how important it is to convince them that they're wrong and I'm right before I get into an argument with them.
I lost my job because of a difference of opinion. Ironically it was because the minority opinion had more power over the majority opinion due to status in the work-place.

I've discovered that sometimes the rights given to the minority can be abused by them, to get what they want.

 

[Cryozombie]

As long as both parties enter the agreement voluntarily (whether for an hour or a week) I don't think it should matter.
So why are so many people who are otherwise pro-freedom and anti government meddling, so against an activity borne from the same freedom?

Yeah I never got this either, but I hear people argue all the time that Prostituion isn't victimless because the prostitutes are usually "forced" either by someone or by their situation, or because it effects their families if men have easy access to extramarital sex.

I roll my eyes.

 

[granfire]

I think we need to get a little away from specific ideals and opinions.

Though you know, maybe abortions and gay marriage are not all that bad, considering the opposition usually roots their opinion in religion: it's my opinion that my religious ideals are superior to yours, so deal with it, and abide by them!
It is my opinion that a lawn should be loo longer than 2 inches (screw the gardeners who say 3-4 is better) and a pair of pink flamingos is a must (or garden gnomes)
It is my opinion that white shoes after Labor Day are tacky, you slut...

Somewhere along the line we have gotten stuck in the kindergarden stage when everything we did was super good genius and brilliant.
I am so spechul you can't disagree wif me, if you do you are a big mean poopyhead...
And the 'Me' generation was supposed to have lived in the 80s...or are these the kids of those?

facts are sadly secondary...at best. Not everybody is this spechul, some (most) people don't even crack mediocre....
You are entitled to your opinion
you are not entitled to your own facts....(now who said that?)

 

[Tez3]

I think we need to get a little away from specific ideals and opinions.

Though you know, maybe abortions and gay marriage are not all that bad, considering the opposition usually roots their opinion in religion: it's my opinion that my religious ideals are superior to yours, so deal with it, and abide by them!
It is my opinion that a lawn should be loo longer than 2 inches (screw the gardeners who say 3-4 is better) and a pair of pink flamingos is a must (or garden gnomes)
It is my opinion that white shoes after Labor Day are tacky, you slut...

Somewhere along the line we have gotten stuck in the kindergarden stage when everything we did was super good genius and brilliant.
I am so spechul you can't disagree wif me, if you do you are a big mean poopyhead...
And the 'Me' generation was supposed to have lived in the 80s...or are these the kids of those?

facts are sadly secondary...at best. Not everybody is this spechul, some (most) people don't even crack mediocre....
You are entitled to your opinion
you are not entitled to your own facts....(now who said that?)

Hallelujah!

Even on a thread discussing opinions we have people missing the point and trying to force opinions on us!

I like this one too.
"The degree of one's emotions varies inversely with one's knowledge of the facts: the less you know the hotter you get." -- Bertrand Russell

 

[yorkshirelad]

I think we need to get a little away from specific ideals and opinions.

Though you know, maybe abortions and gay marriage are not all that bad, considering the opposition usually roots their opinion in religion: it's my opinion that my religious ideals are superior to yours, so deal with it, and abide by them!

But you don't have to be religious to believe that killing babies is wrong! Are you religious Gran? Do you believe killing babies is wrong?

As for the gay marriage thing, I think they should just allow it. I have a great marriage and allowing gays to marry won't effect my marriage in the least. It does disturb me however when, so called tolerant Liberals cry for gay marriage and yet decry polygamy, cousins marrying and estranged brothers and sisters marrying. If one alternative are given the privelege, then all alternatives that involve consenting adults should also be allowed.

 

[WC_lun]

Opions are niether good nor bad in and of themselves. The problem is when opinion is substituted for fact, and then used as a basis for not only making decisions for yourself, but others as well.

Society is a balancing act between the rights of the individual vs the general good of that society. For the good of society we accept that there are certain restrictions on the individual. In exchange for those restrictions, the indivual gains the positives of a strong society. Our debate on taxes are a perfect example of this. A person solely thinking of the individual would be for the lowest taxes posible for that individual. A person thinking of just society would be for whatever taxes, no matter how high that it would take to have as close to a utopian society as possible. Now obviously most people would be somewhere between those two extremes, recognizing the rightsof the individual as opposed to the needs of society.

 

[Sukerkin]

But you don't have to be religious to believe that killing babies is wrong! Are you religious Gran? Do you believe killing babies is wrong?

As for the gay marriage thing, I think they should just allow it. I have a great marriage and allowing gays to marry won't effect my marriage in the least. It does disturb me however when, so called tolerant Liberals cry for gay marriage and yet decry polygamy, cousins marrying and estranged brothers and sisters marrying. If one alternative are given the privelege, then all alternatives that involve consenting adults should also be allowed.

Aye, I agree that killing babies, or indeed any sentient being, is wrong. But, just as I am in favour of the death penalty, I am also in favour of the right for women to choose not to carry a fetus to term.

In one case, it is the removal of life from one who has breached the laws of society sufficiently to warrant it. In the other case, it is a person electing their life course will go by declining to allow to evolve any further a bundle of cells that is not yet sentient.

I agree that the second case is less 'fair' on the subject but I am also not vegetarian and an undeveloped fetus is no more human than a rabbit (noting that I am not a biological scientist). I am unmoved by having a rabbit, a lamb or any other cute fluffy creature for my dinner and, tho' I am still emotional more affected by abortion, my rational side wins out on philospohical, social and practical grounds.

I agree on the homosexual marriage angle. I don't approve of it but that's just my religious upbringing twitching.

When it comes to cousins and siblings marrying tho', those taboos came into being for a practical reason. Without them we'd all end up with 'big ole ears and playing banjos'.

 

[Archangel M]

In the other case, it is a person electing their life course will go by declining to allow to evolve any further a bundle of cells that is not yet sentient.

Thats the "feel good" interpretation of abortion IMO. "It's just a bunch of cells" may apply if the abortion happens pretty soon into the pregnancy. But we all know that little humans with all the limbs, eyes, brains and organs the rest of us have get chopped up and washed out as well.

Abortion for medical reasons? Absolutely. Rape? I can be convinced. As "oops I forgot my pill?" No...can't agree with that at all.

 

[billc]

one of the practical issues for enactment of gay marriage is religous freedom here in the states. If a religion believes it is wrong to have gay marriage, it won't be any time at all before you may have gay activists in their churches trying to get married, when they are refused, on religious grounds, the law suits will start.

YOu already have the catholic church on the verge of giving up its adoption services because they will not help place children in gay families. You may not agree, but it is an issue of religious freedom.

 

[WC_lun]

one of the practical issues for enactment of gay marriage is religous freedom here in the states. If a religion believes it is wrong to have gay marriage, it won't be any time at all before you may have gay activists in their churches trying to get married, when they are refused, on religious grounds, the law suits will start.

Nope, not at all. Actually the seperation of church and state protects the church in this case. A church is free to follow its' beliefs by not allowing the ceremony for gays. However, since our government is secular, religious belief is not a basis for, nor carry the weight of law...or shouldn't be.

 

[yorkshirelad]

Aye, I agree that killing babies, or indeed any sentient being, is wrong. But, just as I am in favour of the death penalty, I am also in favour of the right for women to choose not to carry a fetus to term.

In one case, it is the removal of life from one who has breached the laws of society sufficiently to warrant it. In the other case, it is a person electing their life course will go by declining to allow to evolve any further a bundle of cells that is not yet sentient..

Well this shows consistency on your part. I abhor the lefties over here who cry and march to have the likes of filth like Tookie Williams spared the death penalty, while on the other hand have no problem with a thirteen year old girl have an abortion through Planned Parenthood without parental knowledge or consent.

When it comes to cousins and siblings marrying tho', those taboos came into being for a practical reason. Without them we'd all end up with 'big ole ears and playing banjos'.

Lol! Your practical reasons can be construed as biological engineering. If this was the reason for cousins or siblings not being allowed to marry, we may as well extend the ban to people who have various forms of cancer. Using that argument two people who have familial polyposis should not be able to marry, because the odds are that their children will have the same disease.

 

[granfire]

Oh, since it's been brought up...my spirituality/religiousness is nobody's business ^_^

(YL, if you were a nice person, I might discuss it with you, but since you share the bridge with a couple of your friends, I won't)

 

[yorkshirelad]

Oh, since it's been brought up...my spirituality/religiousness is nobody's business ^_^

(YL, if you were a nice person, I might discuss it with you, but since you share the bridge with a couple of your friends, I won't)

Well Gran, it looks like you don't want to answer the question. I love how you and a few others, mostly the women like, to go on the offensive and spout your hatred when you don't like the fact that some of us don't agree with your point of view. Then cry, get offended and go tell, when you're given the same treatment! Oh well, it is what it is!