Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

02-18-2017 , 03:53 PM
Quote:
As far as I'm concerned on the Milo/Berkeley issue, him being allowed to speak and protesters shutting it down is the perfect solution. That's a lot of freedom.
Shutting down a speaking engagement by use of a powerful overwhelming protest does not take away anybody's freedom of speech.
02-18-2017 , 03:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Not every single word they say is wrong, but generally they are wrong.
Did you watch the episode of Maher? He had Leah Remini on to talk about her series on Scientology. Would you agree that religion is so clearly poison. The only difference between that position and the argument against Islam is that the latter has more adherents.

As they say they only difference between an atheist and a religious person is the religious person says every god ever created is false except one. The atheist takes it one god further.
02-18-2017 , 03:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by einbert
Should people be trying to stop idiots who want to protest Milo from speaking?
People try to stop Milo from speaking at universities because he is an abhorrent person who outs LGBT/illegal immigrant students without their knowledge in addition to the usual alt right stuff. Why should this be tolerated and given a venue? He was banned on Twitter for repeatedly doing similar things as well. He is just a troll. Giving them platforms is exactly what they want. They should be ostracized to the fringes of society.
02-18-2017 , 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by amoeba
All fundamentalism and extremism is poison, including atheism. This is coming from an atheist.
I'm not criticizing Maher here because I think Islam is correct or anything. Being a dogmatic atheist is akin to dogmatically believing in gravity. If we discover some day that the known universe is being twirled around on a string by God and gravity is an illusion we can still change our minds on both.

The problem with Maher, Hitchens and Harris comes in how they treat Islam differently than other religions.
02-18-2017 , 03:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
People try to stop Milo from speaking at universities because he is an abhorrent person who outs LGBT/illegal immigrant students without their knowledge in addition to the usual alt right stuff. Why should this be tolerated and given a venue? He was banned for Twitter for repeatedly doing similar things as well. He is just a troll. Giving them platforms is exactly what they want. They should be ostracized to the fringes of society.
Exactly. And to do so doesn't take away his freedom of speech.
02-18-2017 , 03:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
No, even when those people are completely wrong headed. Debates, especially those when one side is so obviously correct, are won when the idiotic side gets to speak and be shown for what they are.
We just had two years of debates culminating in the election of Donald Trump.
02-18-2017 , 03:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet

The problem with Maher, Hitchens and Harris comes in how they treat Islam differently than other religions.
It is objectively different. You must concede some religious are worse than others? Once you make this concession you can't critique Hitchens genealogy position. You can of course argue they are wrong on thier ranking of bad religions.
02-18-2017 , 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
It is objectively different. You must concede some religious are worse than others? Once you make this concession you can't critique Hitchens genealogy position. You can of course argue they are wrong on thier ranking of bad religions.
Now we're getting into the other big problem with those three guys, which is that they often argue from a point of ignorance. Spend more time learning about Islam and less time criticizing it ignorantly is what I would say to someone like Maher.
02-18-2017 , 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
We just had two years of debates culminating in the election of Donald Trump.
Your historic lens is focussed to too narrowly. We lost the election but will certainly win in the arc of history.
02-18-2017 , 04:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by einbert
Exactly. And to do so doesn't take away his freedom of speech.
Nearly the entire "political" history of Milo is just targeted harassment of minorities. Again, give me one good argument as to why places should host a venue when his only goal is to harass and intimidate others while cultivating his brand?
02-18-2017 , 04:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by amoeba
Wait, you think Tomi was railroaded when she was on? Lol. Nobody spoke over her. She just didnt have any credible arguments.
Sorry if I misunderstood your point, you were talking about show formats. What I often see including on Maher's show and shows like the view and lots of cable shows is a panel containing 4 liberals and one conservative so that you don't really get to hear more than a few words before someone jumps in. A one on one like the Maher/Milo interview allows you to understand the points both people are making.
02-18-2017 , 04:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330


Interesting thread.
Thanks that is interesting and uplifting.

It also speaks to the larger issue that while arm-chair politics is fun - we really have no ****ing clue what goes on behind the scenes, which is like 99% of the action. We only know what they choose to send out to the media - through leaks or official channels. It's like looking through a periscope.
02-18-2017 , 04:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by einbert
Now we're getting into the other big problem with those three guys, which is that they often argue from a point of ignorance. Spend more time learning about Islam and less time criticizing it ignorantly is what I would say to someone like Maher.
I can't speak for Maher but Harris is a world class scholar on Islam. By no definition is he arguing from ignorance.
02-18-2017 , 04:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
Nearly the entire "political" history of Milo is just targeted harassment of minorities. Again, give me one good argument as to why places should host a venue when his only goal is to harass and intimidate others while cultivating his brand?
I never said they should. I think you and I agree on this issue. My entire argument is that private parties like universities (this gets complicated because some of them are public) SHOULDN'T invite him ever, and that isn't taking away any of his freedom of speech because there is no government intervention involved. A private party (Bill Maher/HBO, for example) has absolutely no obligation to have a person like Milo on whatsoever and they shouldn't.
02-18-2017 , 04:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
I can't speak for Maher but Harris is a world class scholar on Islam. By no definition is he arguing from ignorance.
How do you feel that Islam and other religions are fundamentally different? Especially when you say yourself that all religions are poisonous. Isn't terrorism committed all the time in the name of Christianity? And yet we don't seem to link that terrorism to the religion in the same way as a society.
02-18-2017 , 04:04 PM
I'm agreeing with you just your quote was a good place to start my next post, it wasn't a refutation of anything of yours.
02-18-2017 , 04:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Did you watch the episode of Maher? He had Leah Remini on to talk about her series on Scientology. Would you agree that religion is so clearly poison. The only difference between that position and the argument against Islam is that the latter has more adherents.

As they say they only difference between an atheist and a religious person is the religious person says every god ever created is false except one. The atheist takes it one god further.
I'm not necessarily saying all religions have to be treated equally. Fundamentally I think people should be judged by their actions, not the precepts of religions which most people interpret in their own way. And it's very definitely harmful and counterproductive as far as getting your way (ostensibly liberalizing people) to insult the tenets of Islam.

But, I can foolishly get all SMPish as well and state the obvious that Christianity is worse than Islam.
02-18-2017 , 04:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jalfrezi
Woah there. Hitchens gave his unequivocal support to the invasion of Iraq. It's hard to see how that was right.
I like Harris, but he's basically a neo-con too. The *logic* he uses to arrive there is tortured to say the least.
02-18-2017 , 04:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by einbert
I never said they should. I think you and I agree on this issue. My entire argument is that private parties like universities (this gets complicated because some of them are public) SHOULDN'T invite him ever, and that isn't taking away any of his freedom of speech because there is no government intervention involved. A private party (Bill Maher/HBO, for example) has absolutely no obligation to have a person like Milo on whatsoever and they shouldn't.
We need ways to get people on both sides out of thier bubbles. Maher has Milo on for 10 minutes then spends 50 minutes trashing Trump. You don't think some of Milos fans are going to be watching for the first time and may be exposed to ideas and facts that don't breech thier normal bubble?

This is one of the ways we win in the arc of history.
02-18-2017 , 04:06 PM
I bought Hitchens book of essays in university. Some definitely didn't age well.
02-18-2017 , 04:06 PM
I’d like to pushback a little bit on the idea that McCain et. al are not really opposing Trump. They are opposing him just in a super secret I'm a spineless ****ing coward sort of way. They will wait for the exact moment the car is going to to off the cliff then yell WAIT! They saw the car crash from 10 miles out. **** em.
02-18-2017 , 04:07 PM
Maher shouldnt invite Milo for the same reason that he shouldn't invite Alex Jones.
02-18-2017 , 04:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
We need ways to get people on both sides out of thier bubbles. Maher has Milo on for 10 minutes then spends 50 minutes trashing Trump. You don't think some of Milos fans are going to be watching for the first time and may be exposed to ideas and facts that don't breech thier normal bubble?

This is one of the ways we win in the arc of history.
There is literally no soul who is watching because of milo, thus has spent months or longer harassing minorities then watches Maher and switches sides.
02-18-2017 , 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
I can't speak for Maher but Harris is a world class scholar on Islam. By no definition is he arguing from ignorance.
That's absurd and borders on some kind of hero worship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...olars_of_Islam

I don't see Harris on that list and I guarantee he's not qualified to be on it.
02-18-2017 , 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330


Interesting thread.
Very interesting. I'm not really buying it, but it certainly gave me something to think about.

      
m