A genuine debate

Billy_T wrote:

You might ask yourself that, W, after the garbage you pulled in the other thread, saying that people with children care more about future generations than those without them. That’s bullshit and it’s also no way to have an honest, adult debate. It’s deeply insulting and actually just passive-aggressive nonsense.

You should apologize.

Enough? Doesn’t matter who thinks who started what.

Remember the golden rule–do unto others but no board wars.

waterfield wrote:

I’m sorry for offending those who believe as I do on Trump but have no children or grand children. I’m sure there are many such people. It’s just that I have encountered few. I have roughly 11 friends who I can easily call progressives and “leftists”. 3 of them are either married or not and none of the 3 have children. To a person they spend their entire time arguing how terrible Hillary is. The other 8 have extended families including lots of kids. They are deeply involved in preventing a Trump Presidency and less concerned about Hillary’s obvious faults. So in that light its anecdotal. That’s my little world and I perfectly understand that may or may not be representative. And to those individuals where that is not representative I do apologize.

Now -as to the subject of my post-when did we lose our civility when it comes to a genuine debate?

————
And i have worked with literally hundreds of parents who have
completely neglected and abused their own children. Let alone the ‘future generations’.

So, different personal experiences.

I dont generalize mine the way you are doing though.

w
v

waterfield wrote:

I’m sorry for offending those who believe as I do on Trump but have no children or grand children. I’m sure there are many such people. It’s just that I have encountered few. I have roughly 11 friends who I can easily call progressives and “leftists”. 3 of them are either married or not and none of the 3 have children. To a person they spend their entire time arguing how terrible Hillary is. The other 8 have extended families including lots of kids. They are deeply involved in preventing a Trump Presidency and less concerned about Hillary’s obvious faults. So in that light its anecdotal. That’s my little world and I perfectly understand that may or may not be representative. And to those individuals where that is not representative I do apologize.

Now -as to the subject of my post-when did we lose our civility when it comes to a genuine debate?

I have a family–3 young kids–and I find the thought of voting for Hillary nearly as repulsive as the thought of a Trump presidency. I absolutely won’t vote for her. The argument is that 4 years of Trump and then a chance to elect a democratic candidate who actually tries to do something about money in politics, the environment, universal health care, etc is better than 8 years of Hillary.

Zooey and Mackeyser–who both have children I believe–have made that same argument against Hillary in the past on this board. I think it’s at least an interesting argument.

A democratic party that has been almost completely behind Hillary since the beginning needs something to shake it up. Maybe a Trump presidency would do that. That’s why I won’t vote for Hillary. Maybe President Trump will help the party listen more to the younger members of the party who are serious about severing ties with Wall Street, making the environment more of a priority, etc.

The only hope is the younger members of the Democratic party who supported Bernie over Hillary by large margins. It’s the older generation who is bringing us not only possibly the worst presidential candidates ever but has also helped engineer the problems (global warming, humongous deficits, never ending wars) for future generations, like my children.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 3 months ago by Cal.

Billy_T wrote:

W,

I shouldn’t have taken what you said personally, though I really do disagree with your premise.

That said, think about bnw. He’s a YUUGE Trump supporter, and he has kids. You could find millions of parents who support Trump. Right there, that kinda blows up your theory.

I don’t support him. As mentioned, I detest the guy, and I’ve said why in several posts here.

It’s just not a requirement for caring about the world that one has children, and from my own personal experience, I’ve met umpteen parents who don’t and umpteen non-parents who do. It’s not the common denominator for care, concern, compassion, empathy, etc. etc. If it were, then you wouldn’t have parents who support policies and agendas that radically harm others, the planet, the future, etc. etc. . . . and there are literally millions of them in America.

Anyway, hope all is well with you and yours in sunny California.

Detest is a strong word but if that is your opinion of me, OK. I fail to see what is difficult to understand regarding those with children or grandchildren caring more for the future course of this country than those who don’t have children. The children are the future and assuming one is a good parent (apparently that had to be said?) you work your present for their future. People without children really only work for themselves in the now IMO since the effect of bad policy on the next generation does not affect them. Of course skin in the game can be had without being a biological parent such as an adoptive parent, guardian etc.

Billy_T wrote:

Detest is a strong word but if that is your opinion of me, OK. I fail to see what is difficult to understand regarding those with children or grandchildren caring more for the future course of this country than those who don’t have children. The children are the future and assuming one is a good parent (apparently that had to be said?) you work your present for their future. People without children really only work for themselves in the now IMO since the effect of bad policy on the next generation does not affect them. Of course skin in the game can be had without being a biological parent such as an adoptive parent, guardian etc.

Bnw,

Are you serious? I didn’t direct the word “detest” at you. I directed it at Trump. I detest him.

As for the rest: I care about all of humanity, deeply, profoundly. Always have. Its history. Its present. Its future. I care about the earth, deeply, profoundly. Always have. Its survival well into the future and beyond. It wouldn’t change a thing (overall) if I had kids.

Of course, I’d have a different relationship to my kids than to the rest of humanity, for a host of reasons. Perhaps the biggest is that I’d actually be living with them, and our daily interactions would have direct and immediate impact on each other in a way that can’t possibly happen for a parent in Tennessee and a child of other parents in Malaysia. I’d have a focused love for them unlike the non-focused love of humanity and the planet in general. But I wouldn’t suddenly have greater care toward children who aren’t my own than I do now. I already have that.

As in, yes, you are going to care deeply about your own children in a way that no one else likely ever can, but, in turn, you won’t be caring about other children not your own in the same way, either. By definition. Being a parent doesn’t suddenly equip you with transcendent powers of love and compassion for all the children in the world, or the future. No one needs to be a parent to care about other humans. Your concern will be, however, directed overwhelmingly toward your own children, and their well-being, which means seven billion other human beings aren’t going to be on your daily radar — at least not to the same extent.

My focus IS on that seven billion.

Even the Pope only speaks for 1 billion. Still have to disagree regarding parents vs. non parents. For instance the military draft, as in making females also subject to the draft. I would fight against it as I do not want my daughter forced into something she doesn’t want. For someone without a daughter of draft age the topic is academic. For myself it would not be so.

In short, bnw,

Why don’t we just agree to disagree about this? We’re not going to change each other’s minds about any of it.

Yes the draft including females would very much be academic to you. Man made global warming is a steaming pile of BS and I say that as a scientist. The earth is COOLING and has been for nearly 20 years. The global climate is driven by the sun. Paying scoundrels like Al Gore for “carbon credits” and taxing people to do so is ridiculous. I see all the doom and gloom here and I really don’t believe you guys truly believe such nonsense.

How do I favor inequality? If you mean the CEO of a public traded company shouldn’t be paid more than 4 times the average company wage, then yes I guess I do. However you supported that suggestion. Or have you forgotten?

bnw, why do you keep doing that? Why do insist on telling me how I think or feel about an issue? Especially after I’ve just corrected you on your error? I’ll say it one more time: No. It’s NOT academic to me. Get it? Matters of war and peace are extremely important to me. Always have been.

As for global warming. Virtually NO scientist agrees with you that the planet is cooling. Crackpots, yes. Serious scientists, no. You might be able to find one in one hundred. And virtually no scientist believes climate change is driven by the changes in the sun. You might want to study the Greenhouse effect and get back to me.

And the carbon credit idea? That came from the Republicans, from conservatives, and was embraced by the Democrats as a “market-based solution.” Virtually no leftist is in favor of it. We’re in favor of implementing strict laws that make corporate pollution illegal, period. No need to reward people for doing their duty. And we also favor massive investment in clean, green, renewable energy, green, clean agro, transport and cleanup. And work toward ending capitalism, which is THE main cause of our environmental disasters.

We agree on the 4 to 1. But you mocked the idea that inequality was a problem for America, so I based it on that. The two things seem to be in conflict.

Oh, well.

Yes the draft including females would very much be academic to you. Man made global warming is a steaming pile of BS and I say that as a scientist. The earth is COOLING and has been for nearly 20 years.

Sorry–but unless you’re a CLIMATE scientist, your opinion holds as much weight as mine. And if you ARE a climate scientist–well–you’re in the minority.

And those bums at the NOAA disagree that it has stopped warming. They kind of study the planet pretty closely but…you know. I’ll go with them.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/04062015/global-warming-great-hiatus-gets-debunked-NOAA-study?gclid=CKbZ16z0mM4CFQMmhgodob8DmQ

No don’t you tell me you feel the same as myself, when I’m a parent and you are not. You don’t know. You can’t know.

I didn’t say that I feel the way you feel about your own kids. And I made that perfectly clear. I said no one needs to be a parent to care deeply about the fate of humanity, its future, or the future of this planet. No one needs to be a parent to care deeply about our fellow human beings, including children and their future on this earth. No one needs to be a parent to detest war and want peace. No one needs to be a parent in order to be against human suffering, period, on an individual level, or in the aggregate.

You keep insisting it is necessary, and you’re wrong. Flat out, absolutely wrong.

And I haven’t even gotten into the science of the stark differences between left and right when it comes to levels of empathy, care, compassion, concern; or fear, paranoia and so on. I could, but I’m trying my best to keep things civil. But you’re making that more and more difficult each time we have an exchange. Which is why it’s probably best that we don’t have them, bnw.