Law School Discussion

I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...

t...

  • ****
  • 2365
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #610 on: February 08, 2008, 11:06:48 AM »
Sure they can? But that's like saying "you don't think it's possible for someone to simply hold the value being left-handed is wrong"   I mean, sure people could believe it. But how do you justify it? Wrong according to who/what? It's just wrong to be left-handed? Ok....

okay well let's see if you can justify one of your own axioms.  killing other people is wrong.  how do you justify that?

I posed this to J way back when.

I suggested there is no intrinsic value to life, or something to that effect. I can't remember what else we argued about.

He didn't believe I held on to a belief that cornering.

I remember this stalemate.

I don't understand your last sentence though.


Yeah, I suck with words.

Basically you didn't believe I believed that.

etmerian

  • ****
  • 506
  • UM '11
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #611 on: February 08, 2008, 11:08:05 AM »
I don't doubt that you're right in predicting the current social climate...but why should they have to choose between two bad deals?  It's like a law school telling you, "You can't have an acceptance, so I'm assuming you'd rather have a non-priority waitlist than a rejection"

Astro

  • *****
  • 9930
  • Happy birthday goalie!!!
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #612 on: February 08, 2008, 11:10:23 AM »
This is the problem when people start throwing studies at each other -- each maintains that their studies are neutral and the other's are partisan.  So-called "neutral" institutions can be affected with a certain bias for accepting some studies as published and not others; don't all institutions pick and choose which studies they wish to publish, are run by a couple lead publishers, etc?  There certainly have been reports from reputable scientists even over this most recent of conflicts, man-made global warming, that they have been cut off or threatened in some way by their parent institutions for speaking out against the dominant message.  I hope this doesn't open up some type of Pandora's Box with regards to GW..

You're going to call the AMA and the APA "partisan"?

Dude, face it.  One side's sources so far have been mostly been morally charged, and the other's sides sources here are mostly valid and recognized scientific institutions.  Which side would a reasonable person consider "partisan"?

That's right.

Astro

  • *****
  • 9930
  • Happy birthday goalie!!!
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #613 on: February 08, 2008, 11:12:53 AM »
I suggested there is no intrinsic value to life, or something to that effect. I can't remember what else we argued about.

without saying whether or not i think there's intrinsic value to life, i'm not sure how we would JUSTIFY that belief.  :)

It's ok.  We can't be upset with Mr. Linderman for his views; he's just a product of a society that hasn't fully evolved/progressed yet.  I mean it used to be that the majority of people though owning slaves was ok and that the races should be kept separate.  It used to be that women shouldn't vote and were essentially the property of their husbands.  This is just another form of bigotry, and one day he'll realize that his views are antiquated and baseless.  For some reason he, like many people in our nation's history, just needs a group to persecute.  However, things are changing now.

it's cute to believe in progress.  as for evolution, it's mostly about what survives under given conditions, not advancement.


You should rename yourself "The Wise One".

/GAK

Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #614 on: February 08, 2008, 11:14:49 AM »
If someone has a state marriage license, but hasn't been married by the church (let's use the Catholic church as an example), then they are married before the law but the church regards them as unmarried.  If that couple were to try to baptize a child, they would be turned away (or at least have a hard time) because they are considered unmarried.  So why couldn't a gay couple be married before the law, but still be considered unmarried by the church?  The government can't dictate church law, and the church shouldn't dictate civil law.

Bingo. That's exactly the point.

They certainly could. But what i'm saying the word "marriage" will cause such a controversy as to get nothing accomplished at all. there are people that will view marriage is primarily religious, and with such a large resistance, nothing will get accomplished. My whole argument is just that calling it a civil union renders it impossible for religious conservatives to make any type of religious based argument, and then things accomplished. So what if it's not called marriage?

I think this is a problem for several reasons.

1. The separate but equal issue. If the government is going to say we're calling it marriage for straights but civil unions for gays but it's the exact same thing and gives all the same rights, it brings the question - then why can't you call it the same thing? Call everything marriage OR everything civil unions. There is no purpose in separating things unless there is some underlying motivation to somehow "distinguish" the two. And as we've learned from history - when there is an underlying motivation to distinguish the two it is because they are being treated as inherently unequal.

2. This also leads to just logistics. Do you know how much wasted money/time/effort will be spent changing documents (no really, think about it) - to have the Civil Union option. Think of the hundreds of thousands of documents you fill out that would have to add the "civil union" box (from licenses, to tax documents, to insurance forms,  to filling out forms in your doctors office etc...) It would be much simplier and a much less waste of tax payers dollars to keep it all the same name. I know this may seem minor but if you really think about it...how tedious.

3. But lastly, marriage is important because people universally understand what "marriage" means. The New Jersey case for example is living proof of why the word "marriage" is so important. When NJ implemented Civil Unions it affords the EXACT same rights as marriage under the law. But do you know what's happening? Employers, insurance companies, and average citizens don't understand this. Couples are going to their employers/insurance companines and telling them how they have a civil union and they're saying "we only recognize marriage." They're having to seek legal counsel, time, effort, and money to SHOW these employers/insurance companies that, civil unions are the same thing as marriage and they have to provide them with the same benefits. It's time consuming, it's drawn out, and it's a headache that both sides wouldn't have to deal with if they just called it marriage. Read these articles. It's exactly why the NJ legislation is working to change civil unions to the name "marriage." It shows it's not just a word and it affects people's lives.  

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/nyregion/28civil.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/29/AR2007062902201.html



Astro

  • *****
  • 9930
  • Happy birthday goalie!!!
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #615 on: February 08, 2008, 11:15:54 AM »


Oh and cut Linderman a break. He/She is being very civil and open-minded.



Linderman's a He. and thanks for the support. I thought it wasn't going to be long before people said i ate babies and drank the blood of the innocent.


BABY EATER!!!

Astro

  • *****
  • 9930
  • Happy birthday goalie!!!
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #616 on: February 08, 2008, 11:19:47 AM »
This thread is really sad. Everyone is nitpicking with each other, and pussyfooting around making anything that resembles an argument. It's like when people do karaoke, or play Guitar Hero or some *&^% - it ain't the real thing, feel me?

Reach down and say something original, yo.

As for me, I've already sang it:

And as we lie beneath the stars
We realize how small we are
If they could love like you and me
Imagine what the world could be

If everyone cared and nobody cried
If everyone loved and nobody lied
If everyone shared and swallowed their pride
Then we'd see the day when nobody died


Call me a crazy Canadian liberal, I guess.


 :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Dude, this is still the second-best troll of all time.

Astro

  • *****
  • 9930
  • Happy birthday goalie!!!
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #617 on: February 08, 2008, 11:21:04 AM »
This thread is really sad. Everyone is nitpicking with each other, and pussyfooting around making anything that resembles an argument. It's like when people do karaoke, or play Guitar Hero or some poo - it ain't the real thing, feel me?


 :'( :'( :'(

But it's so awesome!

Actually, karaoke is too! Stop disrespecting my values  >:(


You missed my point, chick. I didn't say they weren't awesome, I just said they weren't the real thing, like the arguments here.

(Actually I love to put my hair up and rock the shades while hitting up a few clubs to see how many babes are singing "How You Remind Me" or  "Someday.")

That sh-t gets them wet - I should know. But that's okay, but we're all feeling good, unlike this thread. Not cool.

Anyway, just tell your friends not to think aloud
Until they swallow
Whisper things into my brain
Your voice sounds so hollow
I am not a leader of men
Since I prefer to follow
Do you think I could have a drink
Since it's so hard to swallow
So hard to swallow

So turn the television off
and I will sing a song
And if you suddenly have the urge
You can sing along



Wow.  Old.

::remembers when local radio station was the only one willing to play this song::
::remembers sort of liking the song::
::feels like an idiot now::

Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #618 on: February 08, 2008, 11:27:21 AM »
Roe vs. Wade was ... unconstitutional.

explain why.

Embryonic stem cell "research" is basically paving the way for human cloning

and the problem with that is?

Roe v Wade is unconstitutional because judges MADE law.  That is the job of the legislature.

embryonic stem cell research is unethical because it paves the way for human cloning.
Ever watch star wars?
Do you think it is ethical to breed soldiers?

Interestingly enough, embryonic stem cell research is no more effective or necessary that adult stem cell research.
It is an obfuscation by the left that there can be no advances in medicine without using the stem cells of aborted fetuses.
The conservative viewpoint on this centers around the idea that it encourages abortion and places a positive sensibility on it.
I'm not saying that's right, I'm just saying.
Besides, like most innovations, all the government is saying is that they won't fund it.  That doesn't prevent private investors from funding the research in any way.
Far too many politically inept folks think that Bush somehow made it illegal - he did no such thing.

First of all, I love Star Wars, but even I can't believe you are going to try to use that as an argument.  Next we'll use Total Recall for why we shouldn't send manned missions to Mars?

Encourages abortion?  They are EMBRYONIC stem cells.  From embryos.  Not from fetuses, aborted or otherwise.  (Are fertility clinics ok to pro-lifers?  I would assume they are, since they are encouraging more life, but we all know what happens when we assume.)


Astro

  • *****
  • 9930
  • Happy birthday goalie!!!
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #619 on: February 08, 2008, 11:32:50 AM »
Sure they can? But that's like saying "you don't think it's possible for someone to simply hold the value being left-handed is wrong"   I mean, sure people could believe it. But how do you justify it? Wrong according to who/what? It's just wrong to be left-handed? Ok....

okay well let's see if you can justify one of your own axioms.  killing other people is wrong.  how do you justify that?

I posed this to J way back when.

I suggested there is no intrinsic value to life, or something to that effect. I can't remember what else we argued about.

He didn't believe I held on to a belief that cornering.

I remember this stalemate.

I don't understand your last sentence though.


Yeah, I suck with words.

Basically you didn't believe I believed that.


Nah, I still think you were trolling a bit.

But I understood what you were getting at.  I'm just not as nihilistic as you.  Mores like "equality" would have no validity if your axiom was valid.