• 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!

Should we abolish Columbus Day?

Abolish Columbus Day, replace it with Bartolomé Day?

  • Total voters
    73
Excon said:
Of course you don't. You obviously don't care about facts either.


No he wasn't.

Yes it is.
First of all it is a biased one sided hit piece designed to sway the weak minded. It does not represent the whole story.

Secondly, You are doing exactly what the author wants you to do ... Make assumptions and buy into the propaganda.
Nowhere did the information show he was even charged with murder. Yet you come away believing it. Duh! :doh
Click to expand...

The guy fed LIVE people to dogs. You can just keep on making excuses for him though.
 
ChrisL said:
The guy fed LIVE people to dogs. You can just keep on making excuses for him though.
Click to expand...
And?
That was allowed.
You are again judging by today's standards.
 
Excon said:
And?
That was allowed.
You are again judging by today's standards.
Click to expand...

That's right. I am from today's time. Just because SOME people might have been okay with that behavior in the 15th century, in no WAY makes it right.
 
ChrisL said:
That's right. I am from today's time. Just because SOME people might have been okay with that behavior in the 15th century, in no WAY makes it right.
Click to expand...
And you are still judging by today's standards.
It wasn't illegal for him to do. And that is what you must judge by.

So Truman purposely killed many more and caused great many to enduring great suffering.
What he did was also legal. Do you really not understand the distinction being made?
 
Excon said:
And you are still judging by today's standards.
It wasn't illegal for him to do. And that is what you must judge by.

So Truman purposely killed many more and caused great many to enduring great suffering.
What he did was also legal. Do you really not understand the distinction being made?
Click to expand...

The guy was a barbaric murderer who raped, tortured, maimed, and killed people. THAT is the only thing I care about.
 
ChrisL said:
The guy was a barbaric murderer who raped, tortured, maimed, and killed people. THAT is the only thing I care about.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
He wasn't a murderer.
 
Excon said:
Wrong.
He wasn't a murderer.
Click to expand...

Yes, according to my morals and values he was a murderer. And no, I do not have to judge him according to his times. Besides, from everything I've read, even his own people were quite disgusted by him and his actions. He was basically shunned.
 
ChrisL said:
Yes, according to my morals and values he was a murderer. And no, I do not have to judge him according to his times. Besides, from everything I've read, even his own people were quite disgusted by him and his actions. He was basically shunned.
Click to expand...
All you are saying is that you choose not to view things in the light of their occurrence, choose to assume, and to buy into propaganda.
That is called bias. Duh!
Which is exactly what the author wants the lemmings to do.
 
Excon said:
All you are saying is that you choose not to view things in the light of their occurrence, choose to assume, and to buy into propaganda.
That is called bias. Duh!
Which is exactly what the author wants the lemmings to do.
Click to expand...

No, I'm viewing his actions in accordance with how an educated and civilized society would view them. Regardless of your opinions or how you choose to view things, what he did to those people was horrible.
 
ChrisL said:
No, I'm viewing his actions in accordance with how an educated and civilized society would view them.
Click to expand...
:naughty
No, you are viewing them from what you believe an educated and civilized society would, your educated and civilized society. Which is you viewing them from your time frame, and not his.
His time was also one of education and civilization. They just had different standards.

Just as Truman's actions (which you keep avoiding) were viewed in his time as coming from an educated and civilized societal viewpoint, so will someone in the future try to use propaganda and bias to sway the weak minded that Truman's actions were criminal (in their educated and civilized time frame) even though they weren't.


ChrisL said:
Regardless of your opinions or how you choose to view things, what he did to those people was horrible.
Click to expand...
And yet still not murder. Go figure.
 
Excon said:
:naughty
Click to expand...

Take your little naughty finger and . . . well you know.


No, you are viewing them from what you believe an educated and civilized society would, your educated and civilized society. Which is you viewing them from your time frame, and not his.
Click to expand...

No, I am viewing them from a more educated, technologically advanced and civilized world. That was a silly statement. Education in those times was only for the rich and wealthy. Poor people were not "entitled" to an education in those times. In most of the civilized world today (note the term "civilized") even the poorest people have access to an education. We have learned a LOT of things since the 15th century for God's sake. :roll:


His time was also one of education and civilization. They just had different standards.
Click to expand...

Ha-ha! Now that is just unbelievable. They had "different standards" because they were LESS civilized and LESS educated. Some of them didn't realize that the native peoples were actually HUMAN BEINGS and not animals. Thanks be to God we don't view things like that anymore. Times when they could cut off your hands for stealing food.


Just as Truman's actions (which you keep avoiding) were viewed in his time as coming from an educated and civilized societal viewpoint, so will someone in the future try to use propaganda and bias to sway the weak minded that Truman's actions were criminal (in their educated and civilized time frame) even though they weren't.
Click to expand...

WTH?! This thread is about COLUMBUS. Get a grip.

And yet still not murder. Go figure.
Click to expand...
'

It was and is murder. Even his own people (though many were not very highly educated and they pretty much had a poor and primitive understanding of the world compared to today's standards) from his own times were outraged by his actions. Go figure.
 
ChrisL said:
No, I am viewing them from a more educated, technologically advanced and civilized world.
Click to expand...
:naughty
No.
You are again assuming. That is nothing more than what you believe to be true. That does not necessarily make it true through.
You have no idea if 2000 years down the road they will look upon his time as more civilized and educated then ours.


ChrisL said:
Education in those times was only for the rich and wealthy. Poor people were not "entitled" to an education in those times. In most of the civilized world today (note the term "civilized") even the poorest people have access to an education. We have learned a LOT of things since the 15th century for God's sake.
Click to expand...
And?
That may be the only proper division or education that a society really needs.
You cant say it definitely isn't, only that you believe it isn't.


ChrisL said:
Ha-ha! Now that is just unbelievable. They had "different standards" because they were LESS civilized and LESS educated. Some of them didn't realize that the native peoples were actually HUMAN BEINGS and not animals. Thanks be to God we don't view things like that anymore. Times when they could cut off your hands for stealing food.
Click to expand...
They were just as civilized and law abiding as we are today. They just had different standards.
That in no way make them Less civilized.
Time changes and the pendulum swings in a different direction.
You have no idea if humans will again view things the way they previously did.
Or even come to realize that an over populated world requires different standards of civilization where it would be ok to dispatched with the weak and unfruitful.


ChrisL said:
WTH?! This thread is about COLUMBUS. Get a grip.
Click to expand...
Of course it is, which is why you can not come up with a response that is on point, as Truman's actions are on the same equivalency of Columbus's.



ChrisL said:
It was and is murder.
Click to expand...
:naughty
No it wasn't.
Murder is illegal. He was allowed to do as he did. His actions were legal and therefore not murder.
Just as Truman was allowed to do as he did and not murder.


ChrisL said:
Even his own people (though many were not very highly educated and they pretty much had a poor and primitive understanding of the world compared to today's standards) from his own times were outraged by his actions. Go figure.
Click to expand...
Few were. Go figure.
Just like few were outraged by Truman's actions. Go figure.
 
Excon said:
:naughty
Click to expand...

Again, with the stupid condescending finger, like I said last time . . .

No.
You are again assuming. That is nothing more than what you believe to be true. That does not necessarily make it true through.
You have no idea if 2000 years down the road they will look upon his time as more civilized and educated then ours.
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with what we are talking about. WE are more technologically advanced than society was in the 15th century. Goodness, that was kind of ignorant.

And?
That may be the only proper division or education that a society really needs.
You cant say it definitely isn't, only that you believe it isn't.
Click to expand...

Good Lord. :roll:


They were just as civilized and law abiding as we are today. They just had different standards.
That in no way make them Less civilized.
Time changes and the pendulum swings in a different direction.
You have no idea if humans will again view things the way they previously did.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. We are from today's times and standards, and we do NOT celebrate savage killers.

Or even come to realize that an over populated world requires different standards of civilization where it would be ok to dispatched with the weak and unfruitful.
Click to expand...

Again, this is completely irrelevant to the topic.

Of course it is, which is why you can not come up with a response that is on point, as Truman's actions are on the same equivalency of Columbus's.
Click to expand...

No, I'm sticking with the subject matter and basing my opinions on the subject's actions. WTH does anyone else have to do with it? Obviously that is a strawman because that's the best you can do.



:naughty
No it wasn't.
Murder is illegal. He was allowed to do as he did. His actions were legal and therefore not murder.
Just as Truman was allowed to do as he did and not murder.
Click to expand...

No he wasn't "allowed" to do as he did, hence why he was brought up on charges but "cleared" and was still shunned by the community at large even back then according to a lot of their uncivilized standards and uneducated opinions.

Few were. Go figure.
Just like few were outraged by Truman's actions. Go figure.
Click to expand...

I guess it's apparent that you can't win this argument based on the merits of this disgusting man, the reason why you keep bringing Truman into it. I'm NOT taking your bait.
 
ChrisL said:
That has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
Click to expand...
:naughty
Your assumptions are exactly what we are talking about.


ChrisL said:
WE are more technologically advanced than society was in the 15th century. Goodness, that was kind of ignorant.
Click to expand...
Apparently you didn't notice that technologically advanced was struck out of the quote like this. technologically advanced
It has no bearing on what occurred.



ChrisL said:
Good Lord.
Click to expand...
Showing you are out of your depth in this discussion.


ChrisL said:
Irrelevant. We are from today's times and standards, and we do NOT celebrate savage killers.
Click to expand...
:naughty
No it isn't irrelevant.
It shows that viewing things from your time perspective, and not the time they happened in, is flawed.


ChrisL said:
Again, this is completely irrelevant to the topic.
Click to expand...
:naughty
No it is not. It shows how viewing things from your own time perspective is ridiculous.


ChrisL said:
No, I'm sticking with the subject matter and basing my opinions on the subject's actions. WTH does anyone else have to do with it? Obviously that is a strawman because that's the best you can do.
Click to expand...
:naughty
A relevant comparison is not a straw-man. Or don't you know that?


ChrisL said:
No he wasn't "allowed" to do as he did, hence why he was brought up on charges but "cleared" and was still shunned by the community at large even back then according to a lot of their uncivilized standards and uneducated opinions.
Click to expand...
One. Yes he was allowed to do as he did hence his being cleared.
Two. And most importantly, you have yet failed to provide proof of his actual charges to even make the claim that he was charged with such.
So again, as previously stated, prove it.
Stop lying and talking untransportable propagandist smack and prove it.


ChrisL said:
I guess it's apparent that you can't win this argument based on the merits of this disgusting man, the reason why you keep bringing Truman into it. I'm NOT taking your bait.
Click to expand...
If this is about winning, I won long ago, as legal killings are not Murder.
 
Last edited:
barbaric spanish colombo

you should have learnt how to be civilized from anglo saxons

:mrgreen:


because they never killed any native
 
Medusa said:
barbaric spanish colombo

you should have learnt how to be civilized from anglo saxons

:mrgreen:


because they never killed any native
Click to expand...

That's not cute. Stick to the topic or I will report you for flaming.
 
Excon said:
And you are still judging by today's standards.
It wasn't illegal for him to do. And that is what you must judge by.

So Truman purposely killed many more and caused great many to enduring great suffering.
What he did was also legal. Do you really not understand the distinction being made?
Click to expand...

I am curious, and it pains me to bring this up, but is it possible that given how the war was going and in what direction the war was going that nuclear weapons actually saved lives?

The planned invasion of Japan would have cost hundreds of thousands of American lives let alone Japanese lives.
 
year2late said:
I am curious, and it pains me to bring this up, but is it possible that given how the war was going and in what direction the war was going that nuclear weapons actually saved lives?

The planned invasion of Japan would have cost hundreds of thousands of American lives let alone Japanese lives.
Click to expand...
Your question is irrelevant to that which was stated.
It was a comparison (although badly worded) as to what was legal.
 
Excon said:
That is because it applies to you.

You clearly out of your depth.

Your argument is and has been shown to be ****ing stupid.
There is a difference between killing and murder.
Killing is the taking of life.
Murder is the illegal taking of life.
Columbus's killings were legal.

Sorry you don't like the facts, but they be what they be.



Is that what your problem is? Figures.
Click to expand...

I don't debate fools or kids... consider yourself tolerated by me.
 
Excon said:
Which changes nothing about your being wrong.
It was not murder.
Click to expand...

I didn't argue that it was murder so no, I was not wrong. Keep trying kiddo...
 
Bodhisattva said:
I didn't argue that it was murder so no, I was not wrong. Keep trying kiddo...
Click to expand...
Oh the pain, the pain! :doh :lamo :doh

Yeah, you did.
Your own words betray you in more ways then one, and show that you are telling an untruth.
Red to red underline, ridiculous contradiction.
Blue, to blue, to blue underline, proving you did argue such.

Bodhisattva said:
Under today's laws it would be murder. Just because those laws were not written yet does not mean it was not murder. Only an uneducated tool would think otherwise.
Click to expand...

Bodhisattva said:
The argument was not about today's laws. The argument was that it is murder anyway. They did not have appropriate murder laws back then. Technically it was not murder but it was murder non-the-less. Killing is killing and terminology regarding that for back then is pretty meaningless. Your argument is pretty stupid actually. Only an uneducated tool wouldn't understand why.
Click to expand...


Next!
 
Excon said:
Oh the pain, the pain! :doh :lamo :doh

Yeah, you did.
Your own words betray you in more ways then one, and show that you are telling an untruth.
Red to red underline, ridiculous contradiction.
Blue, to blue, to blue underline, proving you did argue such.



​


Next!
Click to expand...

Like I said before... you don't understand distinction. I did not argue that it WAS murder. There were no murder laws against Natives. That said, it was murder. You don't get it. I understand. Go ahead and siplay your ineptitude again though...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom