• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Breaking: Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Is Promoting Child Porn in the Classroom

ptif219 said:
Really he stated why you just disagree.
Click to expand...

That sentence makes no sense, but I will go with what I think you mean, which is that the guy explained why he did not agree with the APA position. The problem is he does not justify it. The APA article clearly explains why the early research was flawed(kinda like your lifespan claim), and the change in research methodology that resulted in better research.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
Because every single source you have brought up is either biased or an opinion piece. And I'm not the only one who has called you on this.
Click to expand...

Yet you will not show where they are wrong. All you have is you do not like the source.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
What is the point when it is clearly biased or an opinion piece? Just because you are having difficulty understanding the difference between opinion and fact doesn't mean that everyone else is struggling. The only reason you have shown that you see these things as "facts" is because you agree with them.
Click to expand...

So then you have no proof they are wrong.
 
ptif219 said:
Yet you will not show where they are wrong. All you have is you do not like the source.
Click to expand...

When a source is biased or opinion-based, one has to take the so-called "facts" with a grain of salt. In fact, one of the "facts" that you listed was actually an opinion. Once again, you fail to understand the difference between opinion and fact. Seriously, take a step away from the forum for a few minutes to go look up the meaning of these words and then come back.
 
ptif219 said:
Do redheads and south paws demand rights and demand schools teach they are normal?
Click to expand...

They would if assholes ran around talking about the dangers of being left handed or a redhead. They would if they where subject to bullying and violence over the course of their life due to being left handed or redheaded. They would if they where unable to marry another left handed person or redhead.
 
ptif219 said:
So then you have no proof they are wrong.
Click to expand...

And you are STILL incapable of showing us an unbiased or non-opinion based source. It's a topsy turvy world!
 
Redress said:
That sentence makes no sense, but I will go with what I think you mean, which is that the guy explained why he did not agree with the APA position. The problem is he does not justify it. The APA article clearly explains why the early research was flawed(kinda like your lifespan claim), and the change in research methodology that resulted in better research.
Click to expand...

So they say so they can be PC.

I do not believe them. How was it flawed and what makes the new research more credible? I showed articles that show it is true gays die 20 years earlier than others. I also showed articles that explain the health hazards of being gay.
 
Last edited:
Dr_Patrick said:
When a source is biased or opinion-based, one has to take the so-called "facts" with a grain of salt. In fact, one of the "facts" that you listed was actually an opinion. Once again, you fail to understand the difference between opinion and fact. Seriously, take a step away from the forum for a few minutes to go look up the meaning of these words and then come back.
Click to expand...

So you have no proof and just find it easier to condemn the source instead of showing the truth.
 
Redress said:
They would if assholes ran around talking about the dangers of being left handed or a redhead. They would if they where subject to bullying and violence over the course of their life due to being left handed or redheaded. They would if they where unable to marry another left handed person or redhead.
Click to expand...

Nice try but that is not how it is.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
And you are STILL incapable of showing us an unbiased or non-opinion based source. It's a topsy turvy world!
Click to expand...

Are you not capable of showing the falseness of an article you claim is false?
 
ptif219 said:
So you have no proof and just find it easier to condemn the source instead of showing the truth.
Click to expand...

Repeating the same thing over and over again won't make your source anymore credible. Again, learn the differences between fact and opinion and get back to me. :2wave:
 
ptif219 said:
Are you not capable of showing the falseness of an article you claim is false?
Click to expand...

Uh, yeah...I'd say the fact that your sources are either biased or opinion-based pretty much says it all. It's just too bad that you can't see it, like everyone else can.
 
ptif219 said:
So they say so they can be PC.

I do not believe them. How was it flawed and what makes the new research more credible? I showed articles that show it is true gays die 20 years earlier than others. I also showed articles that explain the health hazards of being gay.
Click to expand...

There is not evidence that you have offered beyond one partisan mans word that the change was made to be PC. You believe it because you want to, not because of any evidence.

Let's look at the same thing I quoted for you earlier explaining the difference in research.

In the past, the studies of gay, lesbian, and bisexual people involved only those in therapy, thus biasing the resulting conclusions. When researchers examined data about such people who were not in therapy, the idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was quickly found to be untrue.
Click to expand...

You link to a highly partisan website claiming gays die 20 years earlier, I link to a source which shows the flaw in the research. Seems to be a pattern.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
Repeating the same thing over and over again won't make your source anymore credible. Again, learn the differences between fact and opinion and get back to me. :2wave:
Click to expand...

When you show proof they are wrong I might think you are credible
 
ptif219 said:
When you show proof they are wrong I might think you are credible
Click to expand...

When you show proof you are right I might think you are credible.

Lord, this stuff just writes itself...
 
Dr_Patrick said:
Uh, yeah...I'd say the fact that your sources are either biased or opinion-based pretty much says it all. It's just too bad that you can't see it, like everyone else can.
Click to expand...

If thats the case it should be easy for you to prove them false
 
Redress said:
That is exactly how it is for gays.
Click to expand...

As a south-paw I'm here to tell you that it is abnormal and causes a ton of problems depending on how left-handed one is.

I'm fortunate in that I'm not very left-handed, using my left hand for eating and writing but not for shooting or driving.

However, as our brains are wired differently we have to learn how to read and print English backwards. We tend to be visual thinkers which makes communicating with right-handers in the real world more difficult. As my oldest is left-handed my wife has left teaching him math up to me, because I know how to perform calculations in shapes instead of numbers which she has no experience in.

Left-handedness is not just a variation, it is not the same or equal to right-handedness and yes it presents a host of challenges unique to left-handedness which right-handers never have to deal with.

Left-handedness is different.
 
Last edited:
ptif219 said:
If thats the case it should be easy for you to prove them false
Click to expand...

Can I ask a question, just to give me some sense of where you are coming from? And I am not trying to be insulting so if you get offended, just say so and I will give my apologies, in advance.

Do you have a learning disability of some sort or maybe a behavioral issue that hinders your ability to communicate effectively?
 
Redress said:
There is not evidence that you have offered beyond one partisan mans word that the change was made to be PC. You believe it because you want to, not because of any evidence.

Let's look at the same thing I quoted for you earlier explaining the difference in research.



You link to a highly partisan website claiming gays die 20 years earlier, I link to a source which shows the flaw in the research. Seems to be a pattern.
Click to expand...

I posted this it even has references yet you said it was bias and did not show where it was false.


The Gay Lifestyle: Nothing Joyful about the Facts
 
ptif219 said:
I posted this it even has references yet you said it was bias and did not show where it was false.


The Gay Lifestyle: Nothing Joyful about the Facts
Click to expand...

Yep and posting it again isn't going to change that. It's a biased slant that does not explore the subject objectively.

A great deal of the studies he cited were based on faulty sampling groups. If you go to people in therapy already, you are going to find people with problems that require therapy.
 
jallman said:
Can I ask a question, just to give me some sense of where you are coming from? And I am not trying to be insulting so if you get offended, just say so and I will give my apologies, in advance.

Do you have a learning disability of some sort or maybe a behavioral issue that hinders your ability to communicate effectively?
Click to expand...

No more than those that claim a article is bias or a bad source but will not show how it is wrong.
 
ptif219 said:
No more than those that claim a article is bias or a bad source but will not show how it is wrong.
Click to expand...

Except I have been doing that. You just ignore it and repost the same tired disproven facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom