UnP, tim, thanks for perfectly illustrating my point. you're unwilling to concede because your opponent is unwilling to concede. beyond that, you've dismissed any opposing argument out of hand (whether it's reasonable or not) simply because it's an opposing argument. that is fox news rhetoric. congratulations, you've become what you hate...

Hey! Is that Freedom Rock?

Well, turn it up!

Original Caption:

New York -- Audience members sit in grandstands known as the People Wall, in the IBM Pavilion at the New York City World's Fair. A mechanical system raised the 500 seat grandstands within the building so that the audience could watch a film on the inner workings of computer logic. (1964)

Should we tolerate intolerance?

i don't know how much more i can take of being WRONG.

seriously tho..it's almost like i can't hear you anymore..so, com'on, TURN UP that Freedom Rock, MAN.

this is going a few different directions, so I'll try to streamline a bit...

unp:
i'm pretty sure you get the gist of my point, and i understand what you're saying as well. i think your responses belie the amount of overlap on our venn diagrams, however. RE: your butt elves, my point is that if you expect me to take those seriously, you have to prove that they, in fact, exist. this is a central tenet of our judicial system, our scientific understanding, shit, even our common sense culture. and we don't disagree on this. you say elves fly out of your butt, i say "prove it." if you can, you're right. if you can't, you're wrong. facts. end of discussion.

however, that isn't to say that if you can't make elves fly out of your butt right now, that you might not be able to in the future. as preposterous as your claim may be in the present, it may not be so 20, 50, 100 years down the road. maybe then, people with anal elves would be in the majority. 100 years ago, tobacco was a health food according to science. now science says it kills you dead. we account for changing situations. if you don't, you're what people generally call a "conservative." (i kid, i kid)

i don't really want to talk about ID anymore. i don't believe in it, and it's a pretty transparent front for a more dangerous idea (religious indoctrination in public schools). regardless, if someone could prove to me tomorrow that ID had any basis in fact (and not just these logically fallacious attacks), i'd give the argument more merit. they don't, so i don't.


stract:
i wasn't specifically calling out unp, but i could've used just about any of the regulars in this section to make my point. i'm just so sick of what passes for debate anymore. and i'm entirely jaded with the political process from having worked in its wake for so long. the people we elect generally don't give a shit about anything but their own power, and we go to the mat glorifying or vilifying these narcissistic assholes.

think of the current state of politics as a psychic vampire. or like the ooze in the sewers from ghostbusters 2. the more it can feed off of people's energy, outrage, etc., the more powerful it gets. "the democrats are coming to take your guns away." "if republicans don't send your job overseas, they'll send your kids." et fucking cetera. the rhetoric becomes more about winning and losing than it is about addressing actual problems. and because you're told every 4 years (and almost never in between) that it's your patriotic duty to get involved in politics, people gladly don their team's colors and chant. if they can get you extra pissed off about something (gay marriage, intelligent design, etc.), it means you keep talking and you keep giving them money and power.

in this grander scheme, it doesn't matter that rhetoric can serve a good purpose. i'd be a hypocrite if i said i didn't believe in the power of words to convince or reinforce. but the purpose of current political discourse is to enhance the power of a very small number of people, under the guise of working toward some greater good. unchecked, this vitriolic rhetoric leads to some pretty disgusting human behavior (murdering abortion doctors, for example). and who benefits from this degeneration of civilization? republicans and democrats who can both use these terrible acts of inhumanity in their fund raising pitches for their re-election campaigns.

what a complete fucking waste.

i think there's something in there about this science thing