Gowing up with a corrupt family and friends of the family........
Veni. Vidi. Vici.
-Gaius Julius Caesar
The Only Thing to Fear is Fear Itself.
-Franklin Delano Roosevelt
You are simply taking the position that while you may very well work to change a policy, you will deal with existing policy in the meantime.
Selecting rational thought is just stupid. Our beliefs is what we THINK is rational. We all intepret being rational differently, and by nature our beliefs are what we think is right and rational, so rational thinking is our default view anyway. You'd need opinions and knowledge from all oppositions before you can honestly claim you are being "rational" when drafting your own conclusion, and to do so you need friends and just general people to get other views from. It only takes one person to shift the way you think. So im going to go for Friends, as personally, in my life, thats whats changed my views the most out of anything.I was just wondering why everyone thinks specifically what they think. Have recent events changed your thinking? Have your parents influenced you? Did a defining childhood event change you? Or have you just thought about your views as you've gone along?
What do you think the way you do?
Last edited by kaya'08; 07-06-09 at 12:52 PM.
"If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in quite a different world" - Christopher Hitchens
> Good to be back, but I'm only visiting for a few weeks. <
If the policy were in Kentucky, I wouldn't work to change it because I'm not in Kentucky.
If the policy were to come to exist here in Illinois, I wouldn't try to change it. I would have tried to prevent it from existing by changing the minds of those who support it, but if the majority speaks and it is against my wishes, I would not place my wishes above theirs.
Conversely, if a policy runs in keeping with my opinion, but it runs contrary to the majority opinion.
It's far more complicated than "when in Rome".
And all of that is predicated on it being the local majority, not a national majority. I oppose pretty much all legislation of this sort on the national level so that local regions can dictate for themselves what they prefer. This keeps the largest proportion of the population happy at any given time.
Tucker Case - Tard magnet.
Son, there's a lot of assumptions in there. Whether free-market capitalism automatically leads to corporatism is a subject of debate. I tend to think that State interference in the free market, in favor of large corporations (like we've just seen with the stimulus) is what causes corporatism and monopoly, not simply capitalism itself.
In reality you almost never find a "pure" example of any political or economic ideology. An UTTERLY unregulated free market will probably never exist, and even I agree on certain bare minimums of regulation...say about 1/100'th what we've got. In a free market, consumer choice and competition will often bring down corrupt corps alone, as long as we don't permit monopoly.
I'm ignoring him not because I don't wish to consider what he is saying, but because I considered it 16 times in the past 30 years...it was BS the first time I heard it, and it is still BS. I'm old enough that I no longer suffer fools gladly.
That is a lie. A bald-faced lie. For one thing, most meterologists are dubious at best about man-made global warming. Do they not count as scientists? This 99.9 percent is an outragous falsehood. Even if it were so, and it isn't, there was a time when 99.9% of scientists believed in Ether and a preferred absolute reference frame...Einstein and Michealson/Morely blew that out of the water.Originally Posted by Joe1991
Not only is he a troll, he's a lying troll.
Last edited by Goshin; 07-06-09 at 05:10 PM.
Fiddling While Rome Burns
Carthago Delenda Est
"I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."