• 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!

An example of a politically motivated headline

LouC said:
LOL

What a load of BS.

Practicing Muslims aren't "religious people in particular"?

LOL

There is no misdirection in the article title.

None!
Click to expand...

more willfully blind people.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
So calling a group of muslims and christians (both were involved) religious is "deceitful". You two are incredibly pathetic and if you read more than the headline of articles you wouldn't be butthurt in the first place. Cry harder, religious bigots, you're no different than the bigoted muslims.
Click to expand...

:lamo
You deny that most people read the headlines and move on...and yet another willfully blind person
 
Buzz62 said:
:lamo
You deny that most people read the headlines and move on...and yet another willfully blind person
Click to expand...

People like you certainly don't dive into the articles much. So explain to us specifically what is incorrect or deceitful about the headline. Muslims and Christians were being referred to, are you saying they're not religious? Are Muslims alone not religious?
 
Buzz62 said:
Well I completely disagree and think you are being willfully blind.
Click to expand...

disagree all you want facts, defections and the rules of the English language support me and prove you wrong. :shrug:
Hence the inability of your posts to contain ANYTHING logical or rational to support your claims. LOL
 
AGENT J said:
1.) factually false gay marriage as been around for centuries
Click to expand...
No it hasn’t, where has it been legal and accepted beginning in 1819?
wrong again the court ruled it was a equal/civil rights and a due process issue which is based off the constitutions which is in fact representative of the people
Click to expand...
Courts are not supposed to do this absent legislation.

3.) you might wanna take this tin foil hat conspiracy theory to the proper forum LMAO its taught because its reality and asic facts. Just like teaching kids people are taller, shorter, skinnier, bigger, different religions, different sexes, different sexual orientation, different abilities etc etc etc its basic common sense
Click to expand...

Not an argument



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AGENT J said:
So wait, your crying because the article title which is 100% accurate didn't specify Muslims but all the info you used to get your info that YOU feel is wrong/not accurate came from the same article. . . .

riiiiiight so you are inventing somethign to be bothered by . . got it LMAO
Click to expand...

You can give a motivated impression with a headline.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
EMNofSeattle said:
1.) No it hasn’t, where has it been legal and accepted beginning in 1819?
2.)Courts are not supposed to do this absent legislation. \
3.) 100% correct not an argument just a beat down of the nonsense you posted and cant support with anything more than your feelings :)



Not an argument



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

1.) yes it has, you are confusing existence vs legality vs religiously recognized etc
2.) they didnt, they ruled based on rights in the constitution
 
AGENT J said:
1.) yes it has, you are confusing existence vs legality vs religiously recognized etc
2.) they didnt, they ruled based on rights in the constitution
Click to expand...

So in fact “gay marriage” did not exist in 1819.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
EMNofSeattle said:
You can give a motivated impression with a headline.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That wasnt donew here, any motivation was invented in YOUR own head and not by the headline. The headline was 100% accurate :shrug:
 
RabidAlpaca said:
So calling a group of muslims and christians (both were involved) religious is "deceitful". You two are incredibly pathetic and if you read more than the headline of articles you wouldn't be butthurt in the first place. Cry harder, religious bigots, you're no different than the bigoted muslims.
Click to expand...

About the headlines, I'm just looking out for the superficial readers like yourself.
About your mistaken takeaway from the story, well I can't help that so that's on you.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
No, not at all. I actually have no problem with the Muslim parents in this story. Nor do I wish they be asscociated with terrorists or terrorism.

The point was the Guardian’s obvious bias, not the complaints of the Muslim parents

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Are you asserting that many Christians are not equally opposed to homosexuality? Because that is patently false. In fact nearly all the anti-gay movement is based on religious objection. In THIS specific case it was Muslims.
 
iguanaman said:
Are you asserting that many Christians are not equally opposed to homosexuality? Because that is patently false. In fact nearly all the anti-gay movement is based on religious objection. In THIS specific case it was Muslims.
Click to expand...

I have already made my argument related to this point and you still wish to be lazy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AGENT J said:
Yes it did as i just pointed out LMAO
Click to expand...

No, you did not. You make a claim and when pushed for evidence just say "well I was right"

Where in the world was marriage understood to be between two room-mates of the same sex in 1819?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
No, not at all. I actually have no problem with the Muslim parents in this story. Nor do I wish they be asscociated with terrorists or terrorism.

The point was the Guardian’s obvious bias, not the complaints of the Muslim parents

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Bias? Are we talking about bias? The story said Christian parents had also complained but it's only an issue because of the Muslims. Had the school been predominatley Christian the headline using the word 'religious' wouldn't be an issue. Would it.
At best, citing this story as an example of bias shows hyper-sensitivity to a (non) issue.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
No, you did not. You make a claim and when pushed for evidence just say "well I was right"

Where in the world was marriage understood to be between two room-mates of the same sex in 1819?
Click to expand...

:lamo what you mean is YOU couldn't support YOUR factually wrong claim of "a few years ago" so now you are desperately trying to deflect and failing LMAO
 
EMNofSeattle said:
So I was perusing some news and say this headline from the Guardian

School defends LGBT lessons after religious parents complain

So, what's wrong with this headline? Well strictly speaking nothing is factually wrong about it, but the impression it leaves is "religious" parents who can be of any religion oppose this curriculum. just garden variety generic religion right?

Well let's click this headline and read the story



so let's analyze the bolded, it says "predominately muslim" but in fact it was not "predominately muslim" it was entirely muslim, buried in the article is the tidbit this school is over 98% muslim pupils.

So why this bias? simple, they need to protect an agenda of intersectionality, and they want to make sure that whenever Islam is not compatible with the left's idea that this is downplayed and described in a way to downplay the fact muslims don't approve of their social causes.
Click to expand...

you have got to be kidding me.

you have a serious hang up on Muslims or a unhealthy identification with some other religion, likely Christian because that is the only way you can find bias in that headline.
 
Grand Mal said:
At best, citing this story as an example of bias shows hyper-sensitivity to a (non) issue.
Click to expand...

BINGO!!!!

any perceived dishonesty but this article title is made up and cant be support by anything logical or factual.
 
bubbabgone said:
About the headlines, I'm just looking out for the superficial readers like yourself.
About your mistaken takeaway from the story, well I can't help that so that's on you.
Click to expand...

What's wrong about the headline? Are you saying muslims and christians aren't religious?

EMNofSeattle said:
I have already made my argument related to this point and you still wish to be lazy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You have not made any argument as to why the headline is misleading, you've just repeatedly whined that it's misleading. If a group of muslims and christians isn't "religious" what the hell are they?
 
Grand Mal said:
Bias? Are we talking about bias? The story said Christian parents had also complained but it's only an issue because of the Muslims. Had the school been predominatley Christian the headline using the word 'religious' wouldn't be an issue. Would it.
At best, citing this story as an example of bias shows hyper-sensitivity to a (non) issue.
Click to expand...

No, the article does not say “Christians also complained” it throws in that the teacher had resigned from a different school because of complaints from Christians 6 years ago, it says nothing about Christians in the context of this story. Also it is interesting to have brought this up because the current row involves Muslims so they have to link Muslims to Christianity. Now obviously faithful of both religions share the same view that two dudes is not a marriage, but the religiously faithful in the West of Christian variety are typically in the political right, and Muslims vote for the left over immigration and welfare policy. In fact in imam in England told his congregation that Muslims must vote for labour. Well now that this episode showcases the problems within the left between Muslims and the LGBT so the media needs to spin this as equal to Christianity to make it not seem like a split within the labour base


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
RabidAlpaca said:
So you're trying to lie and state that the only thing American evangelicals have done is refuse to accept their lifestyle? Why would you lie and make yourself even more dishonest than the article you're railing against. Evangelicals still today want to use the government to deny basic rights to homosexuals like the right to marry or serve in the military. The vast majority of evangelicals absolutely oppose teaching homosexuality in school.

And yes, islam and christianity are basically the same thing and they both pretty equally despise homosexuals. So why the dishonesty, EMN?
Click to expand...

Well, because islam and christianity are basically the same thing is "basically" false. I am nowhere near to being an "Evangelical", but as career military, I agree that they should not be allowed to serve in the military: I have seen the disruption and breakdown of unit cohesiveness, a core requirement of a successful military unit, that we don't need. I don't despise homosexuals, and I don't care if they "marry", they certainly can't procreate. So why are you being dishonest?
 
smallvoice said:
Well, because islam and christianity are basically the same thing is "basically" false. I am nowhere near to being an "Evangelical", but as career military, I agree that they should not be allowed to serve in the military: I have seen the disruption and breakdown of unit cohesiveness, a core requirement of a successful military unit, that we don't need. I don't despise homosexuals, and I don't care if they "marry", they certainly can't procreate. So why are you being dishonest?
Click to expand...

The only dishonest people in this thread are the ones pretending a headline calling a group of muslims and christians "religious" is deceitful and misleading.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
The only dishonest people in this thread are the ones pretending a headline calling a group of muslims and christians "religious" is deceitful and misleading.
Click to expand...

And you must be one of those areligious types commonly called atheists. You should learn more about your opposition, because you don't make any headway with your line of reasoning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom