The OFFICIAL United States Presidential Election Thread! IV

[Bosh]

Originally posted by Dissident
The U.S. should withdraw troops from S. Korea. I fail to see what the problem is.

Another thing Bush has actually done right.

Carter proposed withdrawing all of the troops and set about doing in a very inept manner and then flip-flopped. This pissed off Korea.

The point of my post and Ned's reply was how most of the media try their very best to report on his presidency in the most negative and non-flattering way imaginable.

I could see if that was just Europe, but if just about the ENTIRE world does that then there's a problem on Bush's end too.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The fact is that today, on this issue, Ned does seem to believe that the majority does rule. So discuss this issue, don't bring strawmen like slavery into a discussion about gay marriage.

It isn't a strawman when the question is whether simply the majority saying so makes it moral. Ned is trying to say that it is moral and as justification is saying that since 80% agree with that view, therefore it is moral. That is a fallacious argument, and the example of slavery shows that. Since Ned would disagree that 80% of people backing slavery would make it ok, then he shouldn't use the same criteria in saying that about homosexual marriage. Like Ned said, "When 80% of the people want... it is wrong".

[JohnT]

It isn't a strawman when the question is whether simply the majority saying so makes it moral.

If that's the issue, then ask him straight up: "Ned, are majority agreements all that are needed to make (moral) law? If so, what percentage do you need to make it 'truth'?"

Don't confuse the issue by bringing slavery into it. That is akin to Godwinizing this thread.

[Imran Siddiqui]

If that's the issue, then ask him straight up: "Ned, are majority agreements all that are needed to make (moral) law? If so, what percentage do you need to make it 'truth'?"

Don't confuse the issue by bringing slavery into it. That is akin to Godwinizing this thread.

It isn't confusing the issue. Any moron would realize that what I'm asking Ned is if he REALLY personally believes that majority = moral.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by JohnT


The fact is that today, on this issue, Ned does seem to believe that the majority does rule. So discuss this issue, don't bring strawmen like slavery into a discussion about gay marriage.

fine -- let's discuss the idea of tyranny of the majority in regards to contemporary society

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

If that's the issue, then ask him straight up: "Ned, are majority agreements all that are needed to make (moral) law? If so, what percentage do you need to make it 'truth'?"

Don't confuse the issue by bringing slavery into it. That is akin to Godwinizing this thread.

It isn't confusing the issue. Any moron would realize that what I'm asking Ned is if he REALLY personally believes that majority = moral.

Fine. Then ask that question. Don't muck it up by bringing slavery into it.

back atcha.

[MrFun]

Ok -- so let's stick with the frightening prospect of tyranny of the majority without using anachronistic examples.

[JohnT]

I asked you in the other thread, I'll ask you here (and I ask you this as a supporter of gay marriage):

Was marriage between homosexuals legal in those states before November 2nd?



I could probably comb through 10+ pages of this thread to find this info... but, naw.

[MrFun]

AFAIK, it wasn't never legal before November 2 -- thus, all the legal loopholes gay couples have to go through in order to gain the same legal protections and so forth.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Fine. Then ask that question. Don't muck it up by bringing slavery into it.

Why not? Because it somehow makes you uncomfortable? I couldn't care less.

And if you don't like analogizing positions, I couldn't care less either.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Boshko

If it was just Europe you might have a point but when in just about every country Bush is the least popular American president in memory (Bush is definately the only President that's pissed off Korea in a big way since Carter's troop withdrawl idiocy), then that points to a real failure of diplomacy.

But the real question here Boshko is whether the press outside the United States is so hostile to Bush that everyday reports of events includes a lot of distortion and opinion. To the extent that I have seen the reports, they all do, uniformly.

I think that opinion in the United States is decidedly different from the rest of the world because we have a free press -- by free, I mean a virgorously presented right wing point of view on the air and available to all.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Boshko

If it was just Europe you might have a point but when in just about every country Bush is the least popular American president in memory (Bush is definately the only President that's pissed off Korea in a big way since Carter's troop withdrawl idiocy), then that points to a real failure of diplomacy.

Also, BTW, I would like to know the basis of Korea's dislike of president Bush.

[Ned]

I think the concept that I was getting at is that since partnership arrangements are matters of contract, such matters can be dealt with by default law at the state level on a neutral basis without using the word "marriage" at all. Unless it can be demonstrated by at least clear and convincing evidence that the word "marriage" is required to label these legal arrangements in order prevent an actual denial of rights, then imposing that word on these arrangements is unnecessary and hardly immoral. To do so anyway by court order or the like against a majority view to the contrary is hardly democratic in principle and therefor is immoral in a democratic society.

[Theben]

Originally posted by Ned

I think that opinion in the United States is decidedly different from the rest of the world because we have a free press -- by free, I mean a virgorously presented right wing point of view on the air and available to all.

Sig material.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Theben


Sig material.

I couldn't help but notice the radical left protesters trying to shut down FOX News this summer in NY. Rush Limbaugh has been the target of Democrat politicians trying to get him off the air on various pretexts. Democrat politicians are openly rummaging through is private medical records to see if they can find any crime Limbaugh has committed.

Yes we have free press in the US; but it is under constant assault by the left. Constant.