[QUOTE=J-Dude;27206291]Of COURSE there is.
It's the decision that produces the most gain and the least harm.
Yes, nothing is COMPLETELY right, or COMPLETELY wrong, but choosing the lesser of two evils tends to be the name of the game in politics.
You tell me; was Prop 8 right, or wrong? If you tell me neither, I'll smack you and tell you to stop being a fucking nihilist and join Western Society already.
In any case, we barely scraped by repealing DADT under OBAMA, for Dawkin's sake. Could you imagine it under McCain at all? Not with his attitude.[/QUOTE]
Pretty ignorant thinking...
There really isn't a right in wrong for a lot of issues... This is clearly hypothetical, but say I don't think marriage between two men is right... But you think two men should be able to get married. Why is your answer right and mine wrong?
You see why when you make statements that there is a "right" or "wrong" in these situations, you end up looking like a dick?
In math? Yes, there are right answers... In beliefs? Not so much.
[editline]5th January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=J-Dude;27209492]The philosophy of Democracy? How exactly? Because I've lost my faith in the average man knowing what's best?
About a month ago, a man with no qualifications in the realm of science and an anti-science background, was brought in to oversee the United States' science budget.
An agonizing number of people are becoming increasingly ignorant despite widely available scientific information. Instead of subsiding at last, religion in the United States is running rampant.
Mark my words, if you could find the most ignorant 20% of the voters on a graph, and eliminate them, you'd have just reduced the Republican numbers by a good 45%. And I'm being generous with that figure.
But it's not so much an attitude towards the bedrock of the Republican identity, but what it has become in recent years as an ultra-conservative cesspool that gives nothing and instead wants everything for itself. It is THEIR wish that the poor suffer and the rich prosper, not mine.
You still want right and wrong? Right is improving the standard of living of all people, foreign and domestic. Right is allowing all people to find happiness however they can, so long as they do not physically, psychologically or financially harm another's person or property. Right is seeing all humanity treated equally against the law. Right is freedom of speech, expression and thought. Right is constantly advancing our knowledge. Right is ensuring the life we coexist with is not ruined by our ambitions.
Do you disagree? How COULD you disagree? Is this not the very basis of Western Civilization?[/QUOTE]
What? You are basically saying that all Republicans are idiots and all Democrats are the most intelligent people? What kind of bull shit is that?
[QUOTE=J-Dude;27209492]The philosophy of Democracy? How exactly? Because I've lost my faith in the average man knowing what's best?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, if you want to live in an authoritarian country where smart people make the decisions about how the country is run, move to China. Seriously. And don't say the Chinese government aren't smart, because they are.
[QUOTE=J-Dude;27209492]Mark my words, if you could find the most ignorant 20% of the voters on a graph, and eliminate them, you'd have just reduced the Republican numbers by a good 45%. And I'm being generous with that figure.[/QUOTE]
Actually, your proposal would vastly disproportionately disenfranchise the working poor, who tend to vote Democrat. Nice one.
[QUOTE=J-Dude;27209492]You still want right and wrong? Right is improving the standard of living of all people, foreign and domestic. Right is allowing all people to find happiness however they can, so long as they do not physically, psychologically or financially harm another's person or property. Right is seeing all humanity treated equally against the law. Right is freedom of speech, expression and thought. Right is constantly advancing our knowledge. Right is ensuring the life we coexist with is not ruined by our ambitions.[/QUOTE]
Sometimes we have to allow lesser wrongs to occur in order to prevent the big ones. Scientists having trouble getting the funding they need is a small wrong. Disenfranchising the poor (or anyone else) is a really, really big wrong.
To be completely honest, I believe we [i]should[/i] have licenses to vote. And all you need to do is have an intelligence quotient a decent number above 100, and forget the whole 18 bullshit, if you're intelligent enough it doesn't matter what your age is, it doesn't mean your opinion doesn't matter.
[QUOTE=flarrm;27210955]To be completely honest, I believe we [i]should[/i] have licenses to vote. And all you need to do is have an intelligence quotient a decent number above 100, and forget the whole 18 bullshit, if you're intelligent enough it doesn't matter what your age is, it doesn't mean your opinion doesn't matter.[/QUOTE]
We tried this... They gave the uneducated minorities tests that asked the equivalent of you explaining every detail of everything Einstein ever thought about.
[QUOTE=flarrm;27210955]To be completely honest, I believe we [i]should[/i] have licenses to vote. And all you need to do is have an intelligence quotient a decent number above 100, and forget the whole 18 bullshit, if you're intelligent enough it doesn't matter what your age is, it doesn't mean your opinion doesn't matter.[/QUOTE]
Uhh, why don't we just take the power to elect the president out of the hands of the people and let the electoral college do it's intended job? (Unlike a lot of states which say that the popular vote will dictate the electoral college)
As unconstitutional as the OP's idea is, I'd like it. It'd keep people like me (who know very little about government) from voting. If I wanted to vote, I'd have to do my research and learn about how our country is run, which would greatly influence how I vote.
[QUOTE=zombiefreak;27211152]Uhh, why don't we just take the power to elect the president out of the hands of the people and let the electoral college do it's intended job? (Unlike a lot of states which say that the popular vote will dictate the electoral college)[/QUOTE]
The people vote for people to represent their views... Thus, you vote for the politician you think will vote for who you want. That is why the "popular vote" is usually the one that gets accepted. If a bunch of people elect to have you serve for them and you choose the opposite of what they want, you aren't going to be reelected for a second term.
Actually, do you even know how the system works?
[QUOTE=Squad;27211198]The people vote for people to represent their views... Thus, you vote for the politician you think will vote for who you want. That is why the "popular vote" is usually the one that gets accepted. If a bunch of people elect to have you serve for them and you choose the opposite of what they want, you aren't going to be reelected for a second term.
Actually, do you even know how the system works?[/QUOTE]
I do know how the system works. I was referring to the congressional district method and electoral method for electoral votes where there are no electors and they use the popular vote as electoral votes.
[QUOTE=zombiefreak;27211152]Uhh, why don't we just take the power to elect the president out of the hands of the people and let the electoral college do it's intended job? (Unlike a lot of states which say that the popular vote will dictate the electoral college)[/QUOTE]
Why don't we destroy democracy in the United States?
I can think of a few reasons.
[QUOTE=Agoat;27211156]As unconstitutional as the OP's idea is, I'd like it. It'd keep people like me (who know very little about government) from voting. If I wanted to vote, I'd have to do my research and learn about how our country is run, which would greatly influence how I vote.[/QUOTE]
Why do you need to know how the country is run to know who you want to vote for? I could vote for a guy because I like his hair color. Why do I need to know about government o know that I like a certain candidate more than another?
License to Kill
[QUOTE=TH89;27217704]Why don't we destroy democracy in the United States?
I can think of a few reasons.[/QUOTE]
You're not destroying democracy, as you still elect the senate and house of reps.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
