If your're far right or left you're not part of the problem

[TJX]

You are the problem.

Our view and beliefs are formed by our parents beliefs,the geographical area we live and our life experiences among other influences. Nobody is 100% right or wrong, nobody.

If you feel like your side is always right and the other side has nothing to contribute then you are the problem. If you call people Rethugs or Libtards you're the problem. If your name is mentioned repeatedly in political threads then you're most likely the problem. If youare offended by these ideas then you're most likely the problem.

I can see only two reasons to post political threads. One is to stir people up and try to make them angry in which case you're the problem. Two would be to try and educate and understand. I see virtually non of that.

Instead how about trying something like 'I understand your point. It's a valid perspective but I disagree because ........". Even better would be "I hadn't considered that. I'm going to give it some serious consideration."

We can all see how our politicians are putting party ahead of country. Don't you think it's time we start being Americans first?

 

[Matthew Craig]

I just come here for the porn (mostly). The question is, does making the pic greyscale make it seem classier?

https://images2.imgbox.com/12/62/lpMrx9Nf_o.jpeg

 

[Dribble]

Let me see if I have this right. You are saying that people that tell other people that they are the problem, are the real problem. And yet, here you are telling other people they are the problem...

 

[TJX]

No. You missed my point. It is ok to disagree. They way we disagree is
the problem.

 

[Dribble]

No...I didnt. The playground is to your left.

 

[butters]

how about trying something like 'I understand your point. It's a valid perspective but I disagree because ........"

the problem is when it clearly is NOT a valid perspective. and i was brought up to be honest.

trying to argue the point with zealots of either persuasion is generally a futile act. your suggestions, whilst valid when discussing issues with less-rabid posters, lead only to circular arguments that swiftly devolve into a morass. it's a fine thing to call for more polite discussion, so let's start at the top and call out the president to set a great example by adjusting his own problematic styling.

 

[Matthew Craig]

it's a fine thing to call for more polite discussion, so let's start at the top and call out the president to set a great example by adjusting his own problematic styling.

hur durr Trump has no style. Go fuck a tree.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

If you feel like your side is always right and the other side has nothing to contribute then you are the problem.

Nah.

My "side," such as it is, has plenty of problematic issues that needs to be dealt with and people that need to change. Thing is, those issues and people are in constant praxis of dealing and changing towards the better. It's a life-long process with speed bumps, but it's proceeding. Has been for a long time. This very website wouldn't exist if it weren't for my "side" ever flowing, changing and growing.

Here's the other side:

https://i.ibb.co/S3qRk4C/Dd-AWc-ESUw-AAEb-FD.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/88KD3Dm/Dc-Bv-g-FXk-AE8lfp.jpg

They came out the gate that way, they made the tenor of the country that way and they tripled-down on that shit, even when it's fucking them over worse.

https://i.ibb.co/cyYrdYC/IMG-2678.jpg

That's what they contributed.

So. Until I see a different t-shirt that heralds a different attitude towards a better state of mind, they can go fuck themselves. All of them. And keep on eating the shit stew they served 'til they lick the bowl clean.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/ff51b744122b2477b39cfb200a069fb1/tenor.gif?itemid=4995347

 

[Matthew Craig]

So. Until I see a different t-shirt that heralds a different attitude towards a better state of mind, they can go fuck themselves. All of them. And keep on eating the shit stew they served 'til they lick the bowl clean.

Here you go..

https://images2.imgbox.com/f1/0b/PwARf6p4_o.jpeg

If it doesn't fit you, you can regift it to nowisthetime.

 

[TJX]

the problem is when it clearly is NOT a valid perspective. and i was brought up to be honest.

trying to argue the point with zealots of either persuasion is generally a futile act. your suggestions, whilst valid when discussing issues with less-rabid posters, lead only to circular arguments that swiftly devolve into a morass. it's a fine thing to call for more polite discussion, so let's start at the top and call out the president to set a great example by adjusting his own problematic styling.

I understand. While I can not respect someone who isn't honest it seems like there needs to be room to be pragmatic also. If we attack and corner the rabid amoung us don't we also prohibit them from ever becoming more moderate? By conceding ground here and there don't we gain ground for our point of view? Isn't it a case of why should I yield if you won't? I agree the top leadership should change and set a better example but I don't think that's going to happen. I am hoping we at the bottom can set a better example for the top. Thank-you for your response and consideration.

 

[adrina]

I understand. While I can not respect someone who isn't honest it seems like there needs to be room to be pragmatic also. If we attack and corner the rabid amoung us don't we also prohibit them from ever becoming more moderate? By conceding ground here and there don't we gain ground for our point of view? Isn't it a case of why should I yield if you won't? I agree the top leadership should change and set a better example but I don't think that's going to happen. I am hoping we at the bottom can set a better example for the top. Thank-you for your response and consideration.

Question by example.

There is a sizable contingent that views abortion as murder. They use the most inflammatory rhetoric and their idea of "compromise" is to ban all abortions.

How does one give any ground to such extremist beliefs and thoughts? The reality is that pro-choice is the compromise. But they reject that as extremism and pro-abortion.

I don't see any ground to give as the extreme rejects the pragmatic compromise as the opposite extreme.

 

[Matthew Craig]

Question by example.

There is a sizable contingent that views abortion as murder. They use the most inflammatory rhetoric and their idea of "compromise" is to ban all abortions.

How does one give any ground to such extremist beliefs and thoughts? The reality is that pro-choice is the compromise. But they reject that as extremism and pro-abortion.

I don't see any ground to give as the extreme rejects the pragmatic compromise as the opposite extreme.

"My body, my choice.." Except when there's another body inside yours. Fuck you're dumb.

 

[TJX]

Question by example.

There is a sizable contingent that views abortion as murder. They use the most inflammatory rhetoric and their idea of "compromise" is to ban all abortions.

How does one give any ground to such extremist beliefs and thoughts? The reality is that pro-choice is the compromise. But they reject that as extremism and pro-abortion.

I don't see any ground to give as the extreme rejects the pragmatic compromise as the opposite extreme.

Your response is exactly what I'm talking about. You and I have locked horns every time we've commented in the same thread. Your non aggressive response allows me to respond in kind. We aren't always going to change others minds but allowing others to express differing opinions allows them to possibly consider ours.

I'm mostly in agreement on your view of choice but where we differ is that choice is the compromise. I'm confused about how to get further from no abortion than unrestricted choice. That's a topic for a different thread though.

Did Mathew Craig's response leave you feeling like engaging in an exchange of ideas?

One response leaves opportunity for future discussion. The other creates more division and less interest in finding common ground.

 

[Bill_Cosplay]

Nah.

My "side," such as it is, has plenty of problematic issues that needs to be dealt with and people that need to change. Thing is, those issues and people are in constant praxis of dealing and changing towards the better. It's a life-long process with speed bumps, but it's proceeding. Has been for a long time. This very website wouldn't exist if it weren't for my "side" ever flowing, changing and growing.

Here's the other side:

https://cdn1.thr.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/landscape_928x523/2017/05/screen_shot_2017-05-30_at_1.47.48_pm_-_h_2017.jpg

https://coalregioncanary.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/brian-williams.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/kmpqnxpYUqA/maxresdefault.jpg

All these pictures and memes are annoying when they're grouped in one post, wouldn't you say?

 

[adrina]

Your response is exactly what I'm talking about. You and I have locked horns every time we've commented in the same thread. Your non aggressive response allows me to respond in kind. We aren't always going to change others minds but allowing others to express differing opinions allows them to possibly consider ours.

I'm mostly in agreement on your view of choice but where we differ is that choice is the compromise. I'm confused about how to get further from no abortion than unrestricted choice. That's a topic for a different thread though.

Did Mathew Craig's response leave you feeling like engaging in an exchange of ideas?

One response leaves opportunity for future discussion. The other creates more division and less interest in finding common ground.

I never feel like responding to Matt. Or really any of the conservatives these days. Somewhere between libtard and baby killer I've been turned off to the concept of interaction with them. At all.

Now I will ask you, how can it be pro-choice if there are restrictions? Now please remember and be mindful that restrictions these days are purely aimed at shutting down clinics and stopping the procedure completely. Specifically restrictions that are not only not recommended by doctors but have been shown to be harmful.

So, in that vein I will ask what restrictions are salient to the actuality of the medical procedure and can be applied to all women without foisting a differing morality on all? This is the crux of the issue - what restrictions are deemed medically necessary vs ones that are morality based? How are morality based restrictions in agreement with pro-choice?

 

[TJX]

I never feel like responding to Matt. Or really any of the conservatives these days. Somewhere between libtard and baby killer I've been turned off to the concept of interaction with them. At all.

Now I will ask you, how can it be pro-choice if there are restrictions? Now please remember and be mindful that restrictions these days are purely aimed at shutting down clinics and stopping the procedure completely. Specifically restrictions that are not only not recommended by doctors but have been shown to be harmful.

So, in that vein I will ask what restrictions are salient to the actuality of the medical procedure and can be applied to all women without foisting a differing morality on all? This is the crux of the issue - what restrictions are deemed medically necessary vs ones that are morality based? How are morality based restrictions in agreement with pro-choice?

This isn't a topic I'm interested in discussing.

My point is that since we were able to have any discussion in a civil manor the door is now open to discuss in the future. We may or may not agree but there is now opportunity for at least understanding opposing views.

I'm not suggesting everyone has to agree. I'm not asking people to not be passionate in their views. I'm asking people to respect that everyone is entitled to their view

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I never feel like responding to Matt. Or really any of the conservatives these days. Somewhere between libtard and baby killer I've been turned off to the concept of interaction with them. At all.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/3f631f14ba2896d10914e72119f9637b/tenor.gif?itemid=8653974

https://cdn1.thr.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/landscape_928x523/2017/05/screen_shot_2017-05-30_at_1.47.48_pm_-_h_2017.jpg

https://coalregioncanary.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/brian-williams.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/kmpqnxpYUqA/maxresdefault.jpg

All these pictures and memes are annoying when they're grouped in one post, wouldn't you say?

Not really. Well, not me personally. I can see why the reality and verity I posted gets you annoyed, though.

 

[Matthew Craig]

I never feel like responding to Matt.

I was kinda hoping you and Rory, and nowisthetime would've gone full leftist and censor me via ignore by now, but you just can't do it, can ya.

 

[adrina]

This isn't a topic I'm interested in discussing.

My point is that since we were able to have any discussion in a civil manor the door is now open to discuss in the future. We may or may not agree but there is now opportunity for at least understanding opposing views.

I'm not suggesting everyone has to agree. I'm not asking people to not be passionate in their views. I'm asking people to respect that everyone is entitled to their view

In essence you just want people to respect your point of view as you do not respect pro-choice and indeed have even slandered it in this very topic as an extreme viewpoint. What you are saying is not consistent with what you are asking. So that does make you a hypocrite.

 

[Bill_Cosplay]

Not really. Well, not me personally. I can see why the reality and verity I posted gets you annoyed, though.

You wish you were in my head.

And what you post is a bunch of rambling shit. (It's not clever.)

 

[TJX]

In essence you just want people to respect your point of view as you do not respect pro-choice and indeed have even slandered it in this very topic as an extreme viewpoint. What you are saying is not consistent with what you are asking. So that does make you a hypocrite.

Huh? I stated I mostly agreed with you. You said pro choice is the compromise. I questioned that. If no abortion is one extreme and pro choice is the compromise then what is the other extreme? Educate me. I don't think abortion should be illegal
I also don't think it should be a preferred form of birth control.

I respect your right for your view. I don't respect your outburst. I also don't respect your attempt to hijack this thread. It's about civil discussion not abortion.

 

[adrina]

Huh? I stated I mostly agreed with you. You said pro choice is the compromise. I questioned that. If no abortion is one extreme and pro choice is the compromise then what is the other extreme? Educate me. I don't think abortion should be illegal
I also don't think it should be a preferred form of birth control.

I respect your right for your view. I don't respect your outburst. I also don't respect your attempt to hijack this thread. It's about civil discussion not abortion.

Pro choice isn't the opposite of no abortion. Enforced abortion is. See China.

My "outburst" is very pertinent to the discussion. This is one of those hot-button issues where extreme rhetoric and inflammatory language are often used. See Matthew's response above for such an example. The reason I brought it up is because I remember many of those discussions, not only with you but with others. The reality is is that you are one of these people that equate the compromise as the other extreme. Pro-choice is not an extreme - unless you think pro-choice means forcing every woman to have an abortion.

Which would make any discussion pointless until you realize that pro-choice is the middle ground. Do you?

 

[Liar]

If your're far right or left...

Here's the thing.

Nobody thinks they're "far". It's the others that are "far".

Everyone thinks they're the ones with the obvious common sense position and it's the other side that's full of unreasonable extremists. And everyone is frustrated from of always trying to compromise with hardline zealots on the other side who give up nothing in return.

 

[TJX]

Pro choice isn't the opposite of no abortion. Enforced abortion is. See China.

My "outburst" is very pertinent to the discussion. This is one of those hot-button issues where extreme rhetoric and inflammatory language are often used. See Matthew's response above for such an example. The reason I brought it up is because I remember many of those discussions, not only with you but with others. The reality is is that you are one of these people that equate the compromise as the other extreme. Pro-choice is not an extreme - unless you think pro-choice means forcing every woman to have an abortion.

Which would make any discussion pointless until you realize that pro-choice is the middle ground. Do you?

#1 You and I have never had a discussion bout abortion, NEVER.

#2 I thought it was implied we were talking about America. Since we're not talking about China and to the best of my knowledge there are no forced abortions in America that argument doesn't hold up.

#3 This thread isn't about abortion, you want to discuss that start a thread.

 

[adrina]

#1 You and I have never had a discussion bout abortion, NEVER.

#2 I thought it was implied we were talking about America. Since we're not talking about China and to the best of my knowledge there are no forced abortions in America that argument doesn't hold up.

#3 This thread isn't about abortion, you want to discuss that start a thread.

#1 - Whatever. So it was someone else. Shrugs. Get over it.

#2 - Abortions only happen in America? Convenient of you to confine the conceptual understanding of abortion to a geographic area.

#3 - It has proven a great example. You've demonstrated you can't even live up to your own request. But, well, no surprise. Which is really kind of sad.