Post five statements you truly believe but expect most of the board to disagree with.

[elfkin477]

1. Most motorcyclists killed by cars were driving in ways that were unsafe, unpredictable, and broke laws just before they were struck

2. The only moral reason to have an abortion is because the child will have extremely low quality of life and pain due to disease or deformity. Other reasons might be understandable and/or forgivable (rape, mom’s health) but are not morally neutral or positive

3. Declawed cats make better (indoor) pets

4. Atheists who are good people will go to heaven, if one exists. If we’re actually judged by our maker, the whole belief requirement will work itself out then

5. Only bad people list songs title then artist, instead of artist then title

[Frylock]

1. There probably was no historical Jesus.
2. The laws of logic are made of matter.
3. We have absolutely no way of knowing whether there is probably life on other planets.
4. No authority is legitimate–none whatsoever.
5. The illegitimacy of all authority does not imply that we should never create systems of authority.

[Skald_the_Rhymer]

@Frylock

2. The laws of logic are made of matter.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Can you expand?

.
4. No authority is legitimate–none whatsoever.
5. The illegitimacy of all authority does not imply that we should never create systems of authority.

Can you tell us what you mean by “legitimate”?

[Frylock]

@Desert_Nomad

1. Iran is a better ally for America than Saudi Arabia

2. There should be open borders between all wealthy, developed countries with unrestricted immigration.

3. The Democrats and Republics have basically the same policies.

4. Cable TV is a waste of time and money.

5. (reserved for future use)

I agree with each of those! (Not really a strong opinion on number 1, but I know I have formed that impression somehow.)

[Frylock]

@Skald_the_Rhymer

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Can you expand?

Though it’s not really (presently) useful for any practical purposes to think of them this way, I do think that what the laws of logic are is patterns of activity in neural and social networks.

Can you tell us what you mean by “legitimate”?

Good question! A legitimate authority would be one that you should obey without regard to your own interests. If I’m obeying someone or something only contingent on the fit obedience has with my own interests, then I’m not treating that someone or something as an authority. We can describe relationships not like this using the language of partnership and cooperation. We only need to bring in the term “authority” when we’re trying to describe a relationship that goes beyond partnership or cooperation, and into the realm of obedience-without-regard-to-one’s-own-interest.

Of course I recognize that the word “authority” often gets used in normal speech as a label for relationships that I’d call (using the language described above) types of partnership. But part of my point is prescriptive concerning the language–we should all notice that

A) We don’t need the word “authority” to describe those kinds of relationships
B) Blind-obedience type relationships do seem to require a word like our word “authority” to describe them
C) We should suspect that using that word “authority” in describing partnerships serves the interests of people who would like those partnerships to be thought of more like authoritarian relationships. (I.e. employers for example sometimes like to tread this authority/partner line in the language they use with employees.)

[Stoid]

@GusNSpot

Some animal lives are worth more than some human lives.

The average US citizen today does not accept responsibility nearly as well as the average citizen in 1958.

Most people have no real idea of their own mortality. :smack:

Total agreement, especially they are facts, if we can agree that behavior trumps words for proving the truth or fiction of something, and I am thinking of the first statement especially. Most people would not be comfortable stating that some animal models are worth more than some human, but that is actually how we behave, and we should. But that is very much a complete and compelling topic all on its own, so I will leave it there…

[slowlearner]

1. Crabs are worse than cancer
2. American is the most violent culture ever to have existed and you all love it hard
3. Reality is non-rational
4. Peppers should be bred for flavor instead of heat, why be 100,000 times hotter than a habanero but taste like ass?
5. Sex with guys feels okay, sex with women is the best ever!

[VarlosZ]

@Mr.Nylock

His point seems pretty valid; is there something you could point me to - SD thread or whatnot, that would show it to be invalid? I actually find Superhal to be one of the smartest posters on the dope IMHO. Maybe that’s a bad thing - me not being so bright myself I might be a bad judger of intelligence.

I probably shouldn’t have posted that in the first place, kinda rude to ding someone like that out of the blue when he’s never been unpleasant towards me (or anyone else, that I’ve noticed).

It’s just that he posts a lot, and almost every post of his I see, somehow, contains info or outlooks that I know (or strongly suspect) to be false. It’s not about political attitude or differing philosophies – he’s just wrong a lot. :shrug:

But, like I said, he seems like a very nice guy, and I’m sure that from time to time it’s actually me who’s wrong.
Very briefly, the problem with the legalized abortion/crime rate argument isn’t that it’s absolutely wrong per se; it’s that at most it’s partially correct, and it’s not the most compelling explanation. There’s this huge spike in crime starting in the mid-'60s and lasting a few decades before rapidly and unexpectedly abating in the mid-'90s. The abortion theory seems at first glance to do a decent job of explaining a big part of the decline, but the problem with that theory is that it can’t explain why the spike occurred in the first place. Rates of lead pollution are a better fit for the spike, and more importantly can explain both the increase *and *the decrease in crime. The reason Hal is wrong in dismissing the lead theory is because he misunderstands it: the lead poisoning occurs when the victims are children and their brains are still developing. So the people who were poisoned in the '50s, broadly speaking, weren’t teenagers/young men until the '60s, at which point they enter the prime years for criminal activity, and some percentage of them basically have mild brain damage and are more likely to commit crime. The spike in crime wouldn’t show up when the lead was first introduced into the environment, but rather when those affected by it as children became old enough to start robbing/killing/etc.

[madmonk28]

1. Jack Vance and Ursula LeGuin are far superior to Tolkien
2. Racism is a core tenet of the GOP.
3. American football is doomed and heading the way of professional wrestling.
4. Honey Boo Boo is a modern minstrel show and anyone who watches it should be ashamed.
5. America is a second world nation on its way to becoming a third world nation.

[joyfool]

Some more…

1. Anyone who worries about whether what someone does is “adult” or not (they have a name that’s only for kids / they shouldn’t play video games still / only children like X / blah blah blah) are insecure individuals who are actually more concerned with themselves being seen as grown ups. Very transparent and ridiculous.

2. Christians are not routinely persecuted in the US. This may not be a sentiment touted much on this board (although I do see it some), but it’s absolutely freaking everywhere else and I wanted to include because I’m one pissed off about it speshul snowflake. Also, I don’t wanna be on if those types of Christians too, now that I’m re-embracing my faith.

3. There is a strong undercurrent of misogyny here. It won’t ever run me off, I’m sure, but during Grrrrl Power Gate, I can understand why many others left.

4. That said, not everything posted here IS misogyny. There’s a thread about sexist musical acts in Cafe Society who, at least to me, appears to be about anything but. Women can be sexual creatures too, doesn’t make them victims.

5. People who think shit can’t happen to them because they are __________ (so smart / vigilant / caring / whatever – yeah, I’m looking at you, thread in the pit on babies being left in hot cars), are incredibly foolish and lack empathy and understanding. Talk about a “But for the grace of God go I!” situation.

[Charlie_Wayne]

1. IMHO, it is not reasonable to ask for everyone to post five statements.

You might like to specify a maximum. But many folks might not know of five such things.

You are within your rights according to the rules of this board (I think). But I think that is one rule that is just not very well thought out.

In any event, it’s just my opinion.

No offense intended towards you.

[Don_t_Panic]

@faithfool

Christians are not routinely persecuted in the US. This may not be a sentiment touted much on this board (although I do see it some), but it’s absolutely freaking everywhere else and I wanted to include because I’m one pissed off about it speshul snowflake. Also, I don’t wanna be on if those types of Christians too, now that I’m re-embracing my faith.

Yeah, I do sometimes want to ask Christians who are fed up with having to defend their faith a lot whether they’ve been eaten by a lion in the arena lately. Seriously, early Christians would call today’s crowd total pussies when it comes to persecution.

[Charlie_Wayne]

@Red_Wiggler

It appears to be a widespread phenomena, not just limited to here, and it drives me crazy.

Yes Indeed! See what I mean?

[race_to_the_bottom]

@Red_Wiggler

Private ownership of football teams should be banned and adult football teams should be clubs composed of dues-paying members of the community, democratically electing officers to handle operations. There should be no limit to the number of teams playing in the NATIONAL Football League.

I’ll have to get back to everyone with Numbers 2-5. Had to get that one off my chest first.

Good start, but football is bad for the player’s bodies, especially their brains, and should be banned.

[race_to_the_bottom]

@gracer

1. Spanking (anyone at all, but for now specifically children) is an unacceptable form of violence that should hold penalties.

2. Black pudding over bacon.

3. Watching sports is stupid.

4. Manning and Snowdon did nothing wrong.

5. Most people are pretty ok.

1. Good, except that children are not children anymore. Society has corrupted them into immature adults and many learn the corrupt ways of a very corrupt society.

2. ???

3. Not absolutely true, but the US obsession with sports is sick on many levels.

4. Without a doubt; heroes, both of them. The fact that Chelsea Manning is rotting in prison and Dick Chaney is running around loose is prima facie evidence of a decadent society.

5. True. The fact that most people are ok IN SPITE OF the incredibly corrupt society in which they are immersed is a tribute to the human spirit.

[race_to_the_bottom]

@YogSosoth

How dare you?! I’m going to report you to the OP!

checks OP

Fuck.

.
.
.

In all seriousness, I’ve been debating whether to create a topic on this for a while but here’s the gist of my belief:

1. As an atheist, I believe nothing happens after death, and a dead body is essentially a shell of flesh and bone. Its property owned by the survivors and should be treated as such. Any superstition regarding its continuation in any form should be discouraged at least and legislated against at most

2. Living people matter. The most worthless living person should be accorded more rights than the most respected dead person

3. Material wealth only benefits the living

Given those premises, I see little good in treating a Will as a sacred document. At death, a person loses all sense of being and will not EVER come back. It does absolutely no harm whatsoever to ignore their last wishes. Nobody ever, from the beginning of time to the end of time, will be directly harmed by ignoring the wishes of the dead. Therefore, to treat Wills and such as law in deference to a dead person who will never exist again in the entirety of space-time is foolish.

Upon death, unless the property is given to a living person, all property defaults to the government. No, I’m not at all afraid that it will make government assassins more popular.

Without a next of kin, there is no more Mr. X. All his stuff belongs to the living, and the living who makes the best claim for it is the government. If there are descendants, then the property is divided to them as normally done. This is to prevent people from killing others for inheritance, so that part I would keep. But all conditions of estate ownership can be ignored if the living proprietors of the estate chooses to. No weird conditions for ownership: if you’re dead, you don’t get to make any decisions, period

It would encourage people to establish clear lines of succession and inheritance. All laws that determine who is the proper owner of an estate is fine and shouldn’t be touched. But suppose grandpa says that antique bracelet goes to his favorite daughter but the wife is determined to be the inheritor. In that case, she gets to decide, not the old coot, because she’s alive and he’s not.

This is an example of a good argument, which is to say not an argument that one is necessarily in complete agreement with, but makes its case in a logical manner. You don’t see that too often these days.

[race_to_the_bottom]

@panache45

1. How can anyone be so stupid as to believe we don’t have free will?

2. Conservatives understand economics better than liberals.

3. I wish the 2nd Amendment would be repealed, leading to total prohibition of firearms. Unfortunately, this would lead to a civil war, with one side having all the weapons.

4. Why do we have to take a test to become drivers, but not to become parents?

5. Organ donation should be routine and mandatory.

#5. Yes, how do you justify burying millions of perfectly good hearts, kidneys, livers, etc. in the ground to rot when people are dying because they need an organ? This is yet another way that religion corrupts our society. At a minimum, the law should require people to “opt out” and otherwise be considered to be a donor.

[race_to_the_bottom]

1. The D-Day landing in Normandy was unnecessary. The Soviets had already beaten the Nazis. The British and the US only came over to prevent the Soviets from deciding the future of Europe.

2. Football should be banned. It is dangerous for brain health, and encourages a militarist mentality.

3. The government does not create our money; 97% of the money is created out of thin air by commercial banks.

4. Most people think they own private property. Most don’t. What they consider private property is actually personal property like their house, car, and all the other stuff they use on a daily basis. If it does not earn rent, profit or interest, it is not private property; it is personal property. This illusion is deliberately fostered by those few people who DO own private property, to create a popular base for the existence of private property.

5. Sex should be taught in schools. I don’t mean “sex education”. No, adult teachers of sex should demonstrate good sexual practices. This way, for example, boys/men would not need a lifetime to understand how to satisfy a woman. “Okay, today we will demonstrate how to give a really good blow job and how to really drive a woman crazy with your tongue”.

[Mr.Nylock]

@race_to_the_bottom

3. The government does not create our money; 97% of the money is created out of thin air by commercial banks…

Oh lord, you really have no idea how fractional reserve banking works.

[zoid]

@Mr.Nylock

Oh lord, you really have no idea how fractional reserve banking works.

I’m glad you said it before I had to, and his thought on property are…suspect…