Reply
Sackboy
Registered: 03/06/2011
Offline
458 posts
 

Re: Political Correctness - Do We Have A Right to be Offended?

Oct 10, 2013

Grindhead_Jim wrote:

Intelligent people realize that neither fully conservative or fully liberal will solve anything.

 

We need more than two options. period.


No we don't, I suggest not spouting off what you heard in high school/college as some sort of mundane argument of how inexcusable the American political system is. Liberal and Conservative ideals are as close to the middle as you can really get, the only problem is the spectrum that each party can encompass - essentially four parties in two. If you're trying to suggest something like a multiparty system like much of the EU- you're out of your mind, with 300 million people and various culture, there's no way we could have anything more than middle parties without creating more problems.

 

 

 

@OP - Nobody has the "right" to be offended, people are just offended. People have the right to be offensive, the right to accentuate their claims, refute the claims of others and offer structural debate.

 

On the flip side of the same coin, however, you're not entitled to any amount of respect for your opinion - and you don't have to respect the opinions of people who disagree with you for X. 

 

People will take offense to anything if they don't like it, the fire can't be doused.

Complete global saturation.
Message 41 of 119 (119 Views)
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 06/12/2013
Offline
5477 posts
 

Re: Political Correctness - Do We Have A Right to be Offended?

Oct 10, 2013

KIoey wrote:

Grindhead_Jim wrote:

Intelligent people realize that neither fully conservative or fully liberal will solve anything.

 

We need more than two options. period.


No we don't, I suggest not spouting off what you heard in high school/college as some sort of mundane argument of how inexcusable the American political system is. Liberal and Conservative ideals are as close to the middle as you can really get, the only problem is the spectrum that each party can encompass - essentially four parties in two. If you're trying to suggest something like a multiparty system like much of the EU- you're out of your mind, with 300 million people and various culture, there's no way we could have anything more than middle parties without creating more problems.

 


I suggest you not make assumptions about who you are talking to.  My 36 years, including over five years in public service, have taught me that people, in general, tend to identify completely with an ideal.  I find that not truly having any grey areas in our political climate is keeping us, as a nation, from any real menaningful conversations about the issues, rather than which party is right.  The moderate voice on both sides of the current political climate get drowned out all too often by the extreme views.

 

I'm suggesting intelligent dialogue, rather than sensationalist Us Versus Them rhetoric.  Having even one additional Moderate (for lack of a better, unused term) party could help that, in my opinion.

 

If that makes me out of my mind, I do not wish to be sane, because, i hate to tell you, but the current way of doing things just isn't working.

Grindhead_Jim

Message 42 of 119 (114 Views)
Sackboy
Registered: 03/06/2011
Offline
458 posts
 

Re: Political Correctness - Do We Have A Right to be Offended?

Oct 10, 2013

bob-maul wrote:

Thanks for using age as a way to generalize a person. It really helps your argument (it does not). Especially when you did not go after the logic of the comparison I made and only went after the "melodramatics" found in it. 

 

Ad hominems do not make a good discussion

 


It's not an ad hominem if the subject matter deals with subjectivity (i.e. the establishment of rights)? Logical infallacy done twisted up on itself, it done did that. Yup.

Complete global saturation.
Message 43 of 119 (112 Views)
0 Likes
Big Daddy
Registered: 05/09/2005
Offline
19119 posts
 

Re: Political Correctness - Do We Have A Right to be Offended?

[ Edited ]
Oct 10, 2013

KIoey wrote:

bob-maul wrote:

Thanks for using age as a way to generalize a person. It really helps your argument (it does not). Especially when you did not go after the logic of the comparison I made and only went after the "melodramatics" found in it. 

 

Ad hominems do not make a good discussion

 


It's not an ad hominem if the subject matter deals with subjectivity (i.e. the establishment of rights)? Logical infallacy done twisted up on itself, it done did that. Yup.


But when it comes to our unalienable constitutional rights, it doesn't matter when it comes t amendment 1 being that you have the right to say anything you want without being penalized for it. It also protects those who want to be offensive to others and those who are offended by those who are the offenders of those people. You can insult the president, call him a stupid ****** all you want, and there is nothing stopping you from doing that. Political correctness and deciets are protected in the first amendment. Being politically incorrect is also protected under the first amendment too.

In short, it doesn't matter who is right or wrong, it is protected by the first amendment of our constitution here in the US.

 

Edit: language

U--J

 photo 683842d5-5deb-4335-8bcb-5b2166398090_zpsafb7b8da.jpg
Message 44 of 119 (105 Views)
0 Likes
Sackboy
Registered: 03/06/2011
Offline
458 posts
 

Re: Political Correctness - Do We Have A Right to be Offended?

[ Edited ]
Oct 10, 2013

Grindhead_Jim wrote:

I suggest you not make assumptions about who you are talking to.  My 36 years, including over five years in public service, have taught me that people, in general, tend to identify completely with an ideal.  I find that not truly having any grey areas in our political climate is keeping us, as a nation, from any real menaningful conversations about the issues, rather than which party is right.  The moderate voice on both sides of the current political climate get drowned out all too often by the extreme views.

 

I'm suggesting intelligent dialogue, rather than sensationalist Us Versus Them rhetoric.  Having even one additional Moderate (for lack of a better, unused term) party could help that, in my opinion.

 

If that makes me out of my mind, I do not wish to be sane, because, i hate to tell you, but the current way of doing things just isn't working.


I don't have to make the assumption that you don't know what you're talking about, you've proven that.

 

People never fully identify with an ideal. They just typically have no idea what they're talking about and support a name more than a value. That's not good, either, but that doesn't mean they identify with said values. Look up any video on YouTube "Lol these guys don't know that Obamacare and the Affordable Care Act are the same thing." 

 

The political system does work, the assumption that the system needs a change because the people are changing is poor logic. Poor education and the increasing(ly balanced) population also play very large roles in political debauchery. It has nothing to do with a system not working or the need for another "party."

 

With that said, the best way to focus the inevitable flaws that come with a two party system is by informing voters - primarily better ads on the television would be a good start and online voting would be amazing. If people just continuously put a checkmark next to the person who calls themself a Republican or Democrat, then people don't know what they're voting for. The ease in which the parties can change, flex and hash out their ideas in correspondance with the other party is what makes them work so well with our HUGE and DIVERSE nation.

 

More specifically, people seem to attribute social tensions, economic desparity and bad fiscal habits with politics as if it is, in fact, actually politics. Take the recent government shutdown, for example. The issue is not just about seperative issues like Obamacare - it's mostly about the fiscal issue of the debt ceiling. I wouldn't say protesting the media either as any sort of "both sides are being **bleep**" as an acceptable argument - both sides aren't being **bleep**, they just have commendable points that nothing gets done with. Both parties have consistently offered up a clean bill that just gets shot down.

 

Now add a third party into that, three parties offer a clean bill that, instead of being shot down by half of Congress, it gets shot down by 2/3. You've lost progress.

 

Unless the third party is somehow exactly like the other two parties without being the other two parties then we'd be at a complete standstill.

 

I'm not attacking your beliefs, in fact I'm sure we agree on a lot of things on a political/moral level. I'm just simply saying that adding more parties is not the solution - it's just brainwashed banter that formulated from misinformed people.

 

 

 

TL;DR - Adding a party isn't the solution because it would be a step backward with our diversity in values and culture. The independent party already exists as a tipping balance between the Right and Left but misinformed voters don't know what they are voting for.

 

 

 

P.S. I'm not suggesting I have much of a solution either. Although I think limiting Congressmen to 2 terms in the House and 1 term in the Senate would do wonders for how they approach legislation.

Complete global saturation.
Message 45 of 119 (100 Views)
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 11/06/2011
Offline
4421 posts
 

Re: Political Correctness - Do We Have A Right to be Offended?

Oct 10, 2013

I do often feel the lines between Respect/Good Sense and Political Correctness are much too blurred these days.

 

Overall, I think the general public has become TOO sensitive to things.  We cannot bubble wrap the World.  It is a Cold Harsh place.  You either grow thicker skin, or you become subject to every dagger thrown your way.

 

Moble

Message 46 of 119 (94 Views)
0 Likes
Welcoming Committee
Registered: 10/02/2008
Offline
14647 posts
 

Re: Political Correctness - Do We Have A Right to be Offended?

Oct 10, 2013

KIoey wrote:

bob-maul wrote:

Thanks for using age as a way to generalize a person. It really helps your argument (it does not). Especially when you did not go after the logic of the comparison I made and only went after the "melodramatics" found in it. 

 

Ad hominems do not make a good discussion

 


It's not an ad hominem if the subject matter deals with subjectivity (i.e. the establishment of rights)? Logical infallacy done twisted up on itself, it done did that. Yup.


You seem not to understand what an ad hominem is. Ad hominems attack the PEOPLE presenting an argument and not the argument itself. 


Welcoming Committee- "The business of gaming is business"
Message 47 of 119 (85 Views)
0 Likes
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 03/08/2013
Offline
819 posts
 

Re: Political Correctness - Do We Have A Right to be Offended?

Oct 10, 2013
@Kloey: I dunno who you are...But you sure do analyze good n everything. With the points that you make, I must ask..what do you propose as a solution to the quagmire that is this political mess. 10 extra points if you can insult me in your answer!
Message 48 of 119 (83 Views)
0 Likes
Lombax Warrior
Registered: 09/27/2012
Offline
127 posts
 

Re: Political Correctness - Do We Have A Right to be Offended?

Oct 10, 2013
PSN the worst offender for Political Correctness almost every word is censored in PSN Text Chat (none swear words) the word Lasses was censored as if i'm going to remove L & say the rest of it BTW the word Lasses is UK slang for girl or young lady Sony ban SEN accounts no doubt for saying go away get lost leave me in peace or saying ignorant people
Message 49 of 119 (82 Views)
0 Likes
Welcoming Committee
Registered: 10/02/2008
Offline
14647 posts
 

Re: Political Correctness - Do We Have A Right to be Offended?

Oct 10, 2013

moblesuit75 wrote:

I do often feel the lines between Respect/Good Sense and Political Correctness are much too blurred these days.

 

Overall, I think the general public has become TOO sensitive to things.  We cannot bubble wrap the World.  It is a Cold Harsh place.  You either grow thicker skin, or you become subject to every dagger thrown your way.

 

Moble


For example, my French exchange student used the word "negro" to describe someone to me. Someone got upset with him and he had no clue why. He used it as a descriptor and that word has little meaning beyond "black" at home. But this person chewed him out until he was able to explain (with me fixing up the statement a bit to make it more apologetic)


Welcoming Committee- "The business of gaming is business"
Message 50 of 119 (81 Views)
0 Likes