• 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!

DC City Council votes to legalize gay marriage

apdst said:
Why would black guys make uneasy? Or, is this just of the same, "you mean ole racist", Libbo BS?
Click to expand...

No, there is an undertone in your posts that's...let's just say... old school.

apdst said:
SA is crappier than most. It only got worse after Mandela took over.
Click to expand...

Such a bizarre thing to say. And a very limited understanding of a country in transition.
 
hazlnut said:
No, there is an undertone in your posts that's...let's just say... old school.
Click to expand...

Ah, I see. I'm an old school black racist? A black dude that hates niggers? Is that it? You incapable of presenting any real retort, so I must be a racist. Yes?



Such a bizarre thing to say. And a very limited understanding of a country in transition.
Click to expand...


Transition to what? Bad to worse? From the frying pan into the fire? Shot at and missed, **** at and hit?
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
You didn't read the articles, did you? I've already read them and I'm not going to read them to you. Sorry.
Click to expand...

So you threw up strawman articles that ignore the progress the end of Apartheid made?
 
texmaster said:
Totally false. We are talking about psychological evaluation. Perhaps its because I am close to this field because I have family in it I understand it better than you but body language is a key component which is why therapists don't rely on questionnaires for answers.
Click to expand...

Texmaster, as is common knowledge around here, I am a therapist and have been for 20 years. You are absolutely wrong. In psychology, therapist rely on interviews to asses individuals in therapy. In research, questionairres give less subjectivity and are more accurate. There is a big difference between providing therapy and doing research. I've done quite a bit of both. The two are very different modalities requiring difference assessment tools. You are absolutely wrong on this.



Completely false. You obviously have never studied or known any experts in body language. It is absolutely key in a psychological evaluation.

1 on 1 face time is absolutely essential when studying the psychological profile of a person not to mention their honesty or dishonesty on a subject.
Click to expand...

I, myself, teach techniques of indicating body language and am one of the best at this that I know. It is a vital tool in psychological assessment. Thing is, that is NOT what we are talking about. We are talking about psychological research a different issue entirely. In this, objectivity is key; observing body language is subjective.

Again, you are absolutely wrong on this.



Read it again. The majority of their conclusions are cited by footnote of other studies.

Hand 1991, Patterson, 1995, Osterweil 1991
Click to expand...

You read it wrong. What they said was that their results are similar and confirmed the result of the people above who conducted similar studies. So, know, you are incorrect about this, also.



You are going to need to explain this point of view.

A questionnaire filled out unsupervised away from any control, leaves open all matter of outside influences from group think to someone else filling out the parts especially for children.

When you question someone directly you can see facial twitches, moving around in a chair, uncomfortable subjects, and slew of other non verbal communication you cannot get with a questionnaire.

Why do you think juries want to see witnesses? Why not just fill out a questionnaire? Why is it a requirement of law?

Why do shrinks have offices? Why not simply evaluate someone based on a questionnaire?



To believe this is to throw out everything we know and understand about body lanaguage and its effect not to mention allowing the very real possibility of group answers and group think when the questionnaire is filled out in an uncontrolled environment.
Click to expand...

I think I already did explain this to you. Different techniques are used when making a psychological assessment, verses doing a research study. In the latter, for the methodology to be valid, one must eliminate, as much as possible, all subjectivity. That is why, in order to get credible results, researchers will spend a huge amount of time developing questionnaires and measurement tools that can yield accurate results. This is FAR more objective than interviews. Interviews yield too much subjectivity from both the subject and the interviewer.

A psychological assessment is a completely different matter. Measurement tools can be helpful to assist, and I often use them, but the interview yields much more information. But, remember, this is not research. It's assessment.
 
apdst said:
really? Got any evidence of that? I've provided evidence to contrary.
Click to expand...

You have an opinion poll where most South Africans say they would rather go back to apartheid? Wow.
 
misterman said:
You have an opinion poll where most South Africans say they would rather go back to apartheid? Wow.
Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence that things are better in SA, now? Any?
 
Taylor said:
No, I'm asking you for evidence that private marriage can accomplish the same goals as what we have now.

It sounds like you don't have any? It's just an idea?
Click to expand...

I don't need any. Government has no right to be involved in marriage in the first place, because it discriminates when it denies tax supported benefits to some individuals and not others. That's a violation of the 14th amendment.
 
CrusaderRabbit08 said:
I don't need any. Government has no right to be involved in marriage in the first place, because it discriminates when it denies tax supported benefits to some individuals and not others. That's a violation of the 14th amendment.
Click to expand...
Ok, just wanted to make it abundantly clear that when you say private marriages can accomplish the same things that you don't have any evidence for such a claim.
 
Taylor said:
Ok, just wanted to make it abundantly clear that when you say private marriages can accomplish the same things that you don't have any evidence for such a claim.
Click to expand...

And what evidence do you have that private marriages cannot accomplish the same thing?

You are like the atheist trying to say God doesn't exist. You have no evidence either.
 
TheNextEra said:
And what evidence do you have that private marriages cannot accomplish the same thing?

You are like the atheist trying to say God doesn't exist. You have no evidence either.
Click to expand...
Yup. I also can't prove that quality marriages come from an invisible marriage fairy that visits all the good little couples, bestowing upon them love and goodwill.

But then again, I'm not making the claim that private marriages can't do the same thing - I'm asking for a mechanism by which it can, and whether there's any existing evidence that can be used to support the argument. He doesn't seem to have either, and therefore has a weak argument.
 
apdst said:
Let's see how things have improved for the people of SA. We'll be waiting.
Click to expand...

You seriously can't be that stupid. Or racist.

You must be trolling, just trying to get a rise of people by making outrageous remarks.
 
hazlnut said:
You seriously can't be that stupid. Or racist.

You must be trolling, just trying to get a rise of people by making outrageous remarks.
Click to expand...

I wonder if he pines for the good ol' days of slavery in Dixie too.
 
hazlnut said:
You seriously can't be that stupid. Or racist.

You must be trolling, just trying to get a rise of people by making outrageous remarks.
Click to expand...

So, since I call bull****, bull****, I must be a racist? That's the second time you've tried to call me a racist. Why would you calla black guy a racist? Is it because I'm not falling in line with my Libbo massa?

It's crazy to think it's a good thing to go from a few people being to everyone being poor. We're in real trouble if the Libbos ever get an solid power.
 
misterman said:
I wonder if he pines for the good ol' days of slavery in Dixie too.
Click to expand...

You mean when my grandparents were slaves? Those days?

You sure you wanna keep going down this road?
 
apdst said:
If Libbos couldn't scream, "racist", or, "homophobe", they wouldn't have an argument.
Click to expand...
They got pissed at the original comment :)yt) and now look where we are.
 
Taylor said:
Ok, just wanted to make it abundantly clear that when you say private marriages can accomplish the same things that you don't have any evidence for such a claim.
Click to expand...

I'll get you those studies as soon as this country implements non-government sanctioned marriage and we have 10 years of data to study ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom