54 replies to this topic

[Breadfan]

*sigh*
If you're unable, or unwilling, to defend your posts and opinions from criticism, I suggest you stay out of the debating section.

In your response to my post you didn't touch on anything debate worthy. All I can see is that you said that I shouldn't have given my opinion. That's a silly response and stupid tactic.

And who are you to decree what is, and is not, art?
I'll give you a clue, noone.

And indeed, noone else has that right either.

If you were posting saying why you think i'm wrong, that's totally different, but posting saying that I shouldn't have even said anything seems ignorant to me.

[Sweeney]

In your response to my post you didn't touch on anything debate worthy. All I can see is that you said that I shouldn't have given my opinion. That's a silly response and stupid tactic.





If you were posting saying why you think i'm wrong, that's totally different, but posting saying that I shouldn't have even said anything seems ignorant to me.

No, see, this is where you come back and put forward your ideas on why you think social censorship is a good idea, and who, if anyone, should hold sway over it.

[Breadfan]

No, see, this is where you come back and put forward your ideas on why you think social censorship is a good idea, and who, if anyone, should hold sway over it.

There we go. Good job getting back on track.


I actually don't think that Social censorship is a good idea at all. If i had my choice the Government wouldn't be in charge of anything we do. However, The rules ARE unfortunately in place, and these police officers were doing (in my opinion which is not 100% educated on the matter) what their job requires them to do.

[Sweeney]

There we go. Good job getting back on track.


I actually don't think that Social censorship is a good idea at all. If i had my choice the Government wouldn't be in charge of anything we do. However, The rules ARE unfortunately in place, and these police officers were doing (in my opinion which is not 100% educated on the matter) what their job requires them to do.

Curious, since that's exactly what you were proposing earlier.
Good to know you're clear on your own opinion.

[Breadfan]

Curious, since that's exactly what you were proposing earlier.
Good to know you're clear on your own opinion.

Another opinion coming up here... don't take it too seriously...


Just because I don't agree with a rule/law doesn't mean that once it's in place I should completely ignore it.

[33724]

Censoring content can cause confusion, especially if one is unaware that censorship is actively happening.
This silencing causes confusion and is an exact representation of the meaning which the artist is trying to share.
In my humble opinion of course.

Similar things are happening on the internet. The first attempt by the US government to censor Internet content occured on Febuary 8th, 1996 when the US President Bill Clinton signed into law the Telecommunications Bill that included the Communications Decency Act (CDA). With this signage, the CDA became a federal law. The CDA law criminalized "indecent" and "patently offensive" online content. So the same issues are arising on our wonderful wide web.

[Jakerz]

I don't think the police were wrong for doing that at all, guy shouldn't have done it

[Sweeney]

I don't think the police were wrong for doing that at all, guy shouldn't have done it

Congratulations on posting more unsupported assertions in a debate topic

[33724]

Congratulations on posting more unsupported assertions in a debate topic

Apparently you dont understand that when someone says I think, they are giving their opinion. An opinion is a person's ideas and thoughts towards something. It is an assessment, judgment or evaluation of something. An opinion is not a fact, because opinions are either not falsifiable, or the opinion has not been proven or verified. If it later becomes proven or verified, it is no longer an opinion, but a fact. So...there you have it. Hopefully you can bring yourself to attempt to understand it.

[Amagius]

Apparently you dont understand that when someone says I think, they are giving their opinion. An opinion is a person's ideas and thoughts towards something. It is an assessment, judgment or evaluation of something. An opinion is not a fact, because opinions are either not falsifiable, or the opinion has not been proven or verified. If it later becomes proven or verified, it is no longer an opinion, but a fact. So...there you have it. Hopefully you can bring yourself to attempt to understand it.

In a debate, any opinion is based on the values of the person. This opinion must be assessed and evaluated to be a rational opinion. The question is: What evidence or reasons do you think it was right?

Else, it is a unsupported assertion. It isn't we, or anyone, thinks you did not think about this, but if the reasoning behind a decision isn't given, it doesn't actually stimulate thought at large.

[33724]

In a debate, any opinion is based on the values of the person. This opinion must be assessed and evaluated to be a rational opinion. The question is: What evidence or reasons do you think it was right?

Else, it is a unsupported assertion. It isn't we, or anyone, thinks you did not think about this, but if the reasoning behind a decision isn't given, it doesn't actually stimulate thought at large.

His idle opinion consists of views that people don't hold strongly, or indeed that they may not hold the view at all. It may be possible that he just wants to be part of a discussion, rather than debate the topic. Furthermore, while his opinion may be assessed and evaluated, whom are we to decide right and wrong. It may be a valid point of arguement with further investigation, however, we should grant him the opportunity to state his opinion without requiring him to provide us more detail.

Stimulated?

Edited by 33724, 17 July 2008 - 06:56 AM.

[Sweeney]

You seem to be of the opinion that all views are equally valid, that no opinions require support, and that a debate consists of people simply stating opinions as fact.

This opinion is wrong.
This opinion is wrong because views are based on evidence and experience, and no two people hold precisely the same amounts of either. Opinions require support (at least, within the framework of a debate) because an uneducated, ignorant opinion is almost as bad as having no opinion at all. Debates consist of people sharing ideas and/or trying to convince the other to change their opinion, which is extraordinarily unlikely to happen by bald repetition of assertions.

Welcome to the debate section.

[Breadfan]

You seem to be of the opinion that all views are equally valid, that no opinions require support, and that a debate consists of people simply stating opinions as fact.

This opinion is wrong.
This opinion is wrong because views are based on evidence and experience, and no two people hold precisely the same amounts of either. Opinions require support (at least, within the framework of a debate) because an uneducated, ignorant opinion is almost as bad as having no opinion at all. Debates consist of people sharing ideas and/or trying to convince the other to change their opinion, which is extraordinarily unlikely to happen by bald repetition of assertions.

Welcome to the debate section.

Ironic that you bring this up. You seem to often support your own assertions with passive aggressive insults and belittling comments.

I wish you'd focus on the debate instead of why the person you disagree with is stupid. It's as uneducated and ignorant as everything you are babbling about.

Or maybe the Irony is that I always reply to your posts straying even further off topic. Either way if you insist on pointing out that this is the debate section so often, you should probably stick to topic. It reminds me of me arguing with my sister until her only rebuttle was that I'm stupid.

[33724]

This opinion is wrong.

An uneducated, ignorant opinion is almost as bad as having no opinion at all.

Welcome to the debate section.

Clearly I am ignorant and uneducated. Baughhh, here is my degree.

I have a master's degree in Information Technology and Communication Services and am no stranger to debate. However you dont debate anything in this topic. Instead all you do is point out others mistakes and fail to contribute anything of value. Now you seem like a mildy intelligent individual. That being said, if my "opinion" is wrong. Prove it! I encourage you to try and find anything I posted as being unsubstantiated and without merritt. You my friend are a joke.

[Breadfan]

Clearly I am ignorant and uneducated. Baughhh, here is my degree.

I have a master's degree in Information Technology and Communication Services and am no stranger to debate. However you dont debate anything in this topic. Instead all you do is point out others mistakes and fail to contribute anything of value. Now you seem like a mildy intelligent individual. That being said, if my "opinion" is wrong. Prove it! I encourage you to try and find anything I posted as being unsubstantiated and without merritt. You my friend are a joke.

+ Blue to make it true

[Sweeney]

Ignorant doesn't mean stupid.
Ignorant is not an insult.

Stop reading what you think I'm writing, and start reading what the text actually says.

[Breadfan]

Ignorant doesn't mean stupid.
Ignorant is not an insult.

Stop reading what you think I'm writing, and start reading what the text actually says.

Taken from www.thesaurus.com

Main Entry: ignorant

Part of Speech: adjective
Synonyms: benighted, callow, charlatanic, dense, green, illiterate, inerudite unenlightened, misinformed, naive, nescient, quackish, shallow, stupid, unaware, uncultured, uneducated, unenlightened, uniformed, uninformed, unknowing, unlearned, unlettered, unskilled, untaught, untutored, unwitting, young

Antonyms: educated, instructed, learned, proficient, schooled, trained

Edited by Breadfan, 17 July 2008 - 11:22 AM.

[Amagius]

Taken from www.thesaurus.com

Main Entry: ignorant

Part of Speech: adjective
Synonyms: benighted, callow, charlatanic, dense, green, illiterate, inerudite unenlightened, misinformed, naive, nescient, quackish, shallow, stupid, unaware, uncultured, uneducated, unenlightened, uniformed, uninformed, unknowing, unlearned, unlettered, unskilled, untaught, untutored, unwitting, young

Antonyms: educated, instructed, learned, proficient, schooled, trained

Interestingly, dictionaries, not thesauruses, produce the meaning of a word! Try that one.

ig·no·rant // Audio Help /ˈɪgnərənt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ig-ner-uhnt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective 1.lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned: an ignorant man. 2.lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact: ignorant of quantum physics. 3.uninformed; unaware. 4.due to or showing lack of knowledge or training: an ignorant statement.

[Sweeney]

Taken from www.thesaurus.com

Main Entry: ignorant
Part of Speech: adjective
Synonyms: benighted, callow, charlatanic, dense, green, illiterate, inerudite unenlightened, misinformed, naive, nescient, quackish, shallow, stupid, unaware, uncultured, uneducated, unenlightened, uniformed, uninformed, unknowing, unlearned, unlettered, unskilled, untaught, untutored, unwitting, young

Antonyms: educated, instructed, learned, proficient, schooled, trained

Taken from www.thesaurus.com

Main Entry: dead

Part of Speech: adjective
Definition: No longer alive.
Synonyms: asleep, deceased, defunct, departed, extinct, gone, late, lifeless
Idioms: at rest, pushing up daisies

Your point?

[Breadfan]

Taken from www.thesaurus.com

Main Entry: dead

Part of Speech: adjective
Definition: No longer alive.
Synonyms: asleep, deceased, defunct, departed, extinct, gone, late, lifeless
Idioms: at rest, pushing up daisies

Your point?

I know in the Bible there are places where they refer to Death as sleep. Also my grandmother used to use it in that context too. I don't call either of those Proof, but even so I don't see your point.

Ignorant means lack of intelligence knowledge... As does Stupid.

Just because you're cocky and confident doesn't mean you're correct all the time.

//get over yourself?

Edited by Breadfan, 17 July 2008 - 11:41 AM.

[Sweeney]

I know in the Bible there are places where they refer to Death as sleep. Also my grandmother used to use it in that context too. I don't call either of those Proof, but even so I don't see your point.

Ignorant means lack of intelligence... As does Stupid.

Just because you're cocky and confident doesn't mean you're correct all the time.

//get over yourself?

No.
Ignorant means lack of knowledge. Not lack of intelligence.

Just because I'm cocky and confident doesn't mean I'm correct all the time. I'm correct all the time, because I only argue when I'm positive that I'm right.
And even that's not foolproof.

[(33724)]

doesn't mean I'm correct all the time. I'm correct all the time

R u serious? is this your rebuttal?

your arrogance just astonishes me.

instead of taking this way off topic, display what evidence u have proving his opinion wrong. I mean, since you're right all the time

[Sweeney]

R u serious? is this your rebuttal?

your arrogance just astonishes me.

instead of taking this way off topic, display what evidence u have proving his opinion wrong. I mean, since you're right all the time

And even that's not foolproof.

Quotemining. The last refuge of the desperate.

[(33724)]

Quotemining. The last refuge of the desperate.

exactly what is being taken out if context? From what an uneducated man like myself can seem to understand is that you dont want to debate this issue. Now thats either because you have no knowledge of the subjet at hand, or you just like picking on other people because you have a serious God complex.

The rule of the public forum is an outgrowth of "content-neutral" doctrine: under this rule, the government is generally powerless to regulate speech in traditional public fora such as streets and parks, since these areas are property held in the public trust for political use. However, the public forum rule has important qualifying rules:

In a "limited designated forum" - that is, government property opened to public use for a particular purpose only - subject matter regulations are appropriate. Thus, a city may forbid obscene speech and advertisement in publicly owned transportation vehicles, such as streetcards.
Similarly, public school facilities opened to the public as after school meeting places are limited-designated fora.Thus, subject-matter regulation is appropriate in administering public school space requests. However, discriminating against religious speech, while seemingly a subject matter regulation, is apparently a forbidden viewpoint regulation.

Furthermore, The Constitution prevents the government from punishing you for your speech (generally unless such speech presents a clear and present danger. Where is the danger in an art exhibit?

In the U.S., the default position is usually in favor of free speech. For example, speaking or writing ill of a public figure is not slander/libel, unless it is an intentional lie meant to cause harm

Edited by (33724), 17 July 2008 - 12:27 PM.

[Sweeney]

exactly what is being taken out if context? From what an uneducated man like myself can seem to understand is that you dont want to debate this issue. Now thats either because you have no knowledge of the subjet at hand, or you just like picking on other people because you have a serious God complex.

I think my extra quote made your omission quite clear.