While anyone can name pros to a world designated religion, you must understand what would happen in the destruction of all other world religions.
Toleration is what sets people apart and makes them human. Destroying all but one religion would be like destroying anyone's right to do wrong...
Imagine if you completely eliminated the ability to steal, to lie, to cheat...If you force people to live morally, you destroy the only purpose for morals... If you destroy all but one religion, you destroy the purpose of religion.
Prayer should never be a requirement in schools.
However, you should never remove someone's right to worship. That goes against every principle America stands for.
Should we also remove the American pledge...Then any discussion of those silly holidays like "Halloween" or "Christmas"...Why stop with prayer...If you want a school to be completely removed from culture, isolate it. Alienate it. Allow no presence or influence of the outside world.
Religious freedom also means religious tolerance. If a child wishes to pray, let them pray. If a teacher, a principal, any faculty member wishes to pray, let him do so. As a Christian, I would allow a Muslim or any other religion to practice that religion without a word of protest. I have the right to practice my religion, regardless of the location.
No one is given the freedom from being offended. It simply isn't possible. Live and let live.
Okay, to be completely honest, I hadn't been exposed to the sour-side of Fox as those examples demonstrate...A question that arises after watching O'Reilly in that last clip is this: Fox has lied when reporting the news. However, is it possible that other stations have done the same? I'm not referring to bias, but to nothing but pure false-truths by a seemingly reliable station.
After just scratching the surface, it isn't hard to find thousands of examples for any given network..I was trying to provide a link to a PBS mistake concerning Romney and Giuliani trying to "out anti-immigrant each other" back in 2007-I would add it, but it seems to not be working for my computer...
I just read this interesting article concerning BBC as well: http://www.americanthinker.com/2004/04/
Sorry, I can't even embed..
Let me leave you with this and reply to the rest of your argument later, I'm running out of time, but wanted you to see that even accurate news is bias...
All news reports aside, Fox has outstanding ratings for fantastic shows, or at least I hope so...
American Idol? House? The Simpsons? Family Guy?
All of these shows have brought in viewers for years and years to come...
Of course that's not the only reason, but I do hope it is the main one...
When has Fox "flat-out lied"..
Okay, before you start calling me all sorts of names, let me elaborate..
Anyone with the brain of a primate could tell you that Fox twists the truth quite often. However, I have never once heard a bold-faced lie...Possibly, this is because I don't ever use Fox as my source for NEWS, but I do believe that Fox simply tells the truth how they rather it be. They are always careful to contain some glimpse of the actual truth within their bias...
I'm not saying that in the least. My point is this: America has bias news. It is inevitable.
However, it is up to Americans to decipher what is truth and what is complete nonsense. Not everything that comes from Glenn Beck's mouth is complete nonsense.
I believe that your comparison of Beck to the KKK and Neo-Nazis is much more far-fetched than my comparison to a comedy news show, but maybe there's a metaphor I am not catching because obviously you are not seeing mine...
I am not saying that Beck is comedy news, not at all. I am trying to show you that if people are "stupid" enough to believe everything they hear on ANY given news program, then they would probably believe in spoof news shows as well..
It seems to me that you are saying that Beck is just wrong. No middle line, no "opinion" to it, Beck is wrong in what he says. He is polluting the minds of all those who watch him. If that's what your position is, then this is an entire different debate...
because Beck DOES have a Republican following...so that would make all Republicans wrong...which, regardless, is a matter of opinion..Hmm...What's your position here??
Yes, the point of the news IS to educate the public, but how many networks report inaccurate/bias news? Let's shut down Fox then...
Glenn Beck gives his opinion of the news...he honestly believes in what he says. It isn't a daily report of worldly events, but it is an opinionated news cast. He has every right to say whatever he "thinks" on HIS show. It's a correspondent format.
Yes, my example was extremely absurd, as I mentioned in the argument...I stand by it..
If extremely weak-minded people are willing to believe all of Beck's "rants" are fact, then who is to say that those same people would not believe in a comedy television program? The comparison is ridiculous, but that doesn't make it wrong...
Personally, I've seen the show quite a few times...Sometimes Beck has used logic to support his opinions, but sometimes, yes, he becomes too irrational, and just attempts to appeal to his conservative audience...I dare to say that Obama has done the same...Why stop there, everyone in the political field has made comments suggesting that reason is lacking in their opinions...This is not exclusive to Glenn Beck...
I am simply trying to say that though Beck has opinions that to many seem illogical, he still has every right to express his thoughts, and any viewers have the right to agree/disagree...he should not be condemned for voicing his seemingly outlandish ideas..
So you're trying to imply that all public figures should be held accountable for their "craziness"??
Are you trying to tell me this is strictly a conservative "issue"?
You're worried about misunderstandings, but don't these occur on both sides??
What about even the comedy side of this...I'm most certain that the same people believing in what Glen Beck says all the time might just be buying in to the comedy acts of Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart...Absurd? No, not if we are speaking of weak minded people...Let's prosecute everyone who tries to present the truth in their own opinion, or even with satire, don't stop there...Let's just write off everyone who attempts to contribute to the world of politics, but some people disagree with...He doesn't claim that what he says is fact, but just a very strong opinion
I am most certain this is not the America Beck grew up in, we aren't the same country we were 20 so-years ago...
Yea, sure, he's a little crazy...but at least he's entertaining..
I rather see someone, uhm, "passionate" about what they believe...really, really, really passionate...than someone who simply soaks up an idea and accepts it (I'm speaking of him as a political advocate/voter/person rather than a political reporter, of course)
I say if he wants to be crazy, let the man be crazy...!
Reading is still important to today's teenagers...
However, the definition of reading has changed..
As far as books go, cult fiction series are, for the most part, the only contestants
(Twilight, Harry Potter)
However, most teen reading isn't spent flipping a page in a book or even playing around on the Kindle (had to mention that), I do believe it's spent on the Internet. Reading forums, finding the latest electronic updates, and even celebrity gossip is beginning to entice young "readers"...
Personally, I prefer to read up on Hawthorne, and I truly don't understand anyone who can read Twilight, Harry Potter, or anything like it, but to each his own, at least people read, right?
You are exactly right.
The opinion you take on religion is always based upon your beliefs.
Christians make up your majority of Republicans, therefore Republicans believe that abortion is murder.
Democrats, on the other hand, are very diverse. Democrats contain you atheists (I'm speaking in general) and a slur of other minority religions. Therefore Democrats base opinion on the "do whatever you want" principle.
Personally, I am a Christian Republican. I believe abortion is murder. I can imagine how extremely diffucult it would be to go through with a pregnancy that involves one of the major "risk factors" (mentally ill child, mother's life at risk), but I believe Christian values should triuphant all. I know how hard that is in today's shallow society, but we must be strong.
Just my unpopular opinion :)
The wink face takes a LOT of practice, it's more of an art form, really!
haha..I can only make them when creating debates..Until then, I'm stuck with these ;)
=]--those are neat too!
Anyway, I've been inactive due to 2 reasons...
1. My schedule has been overbooked-crazy i tell you, crazy!
2. Now, it is possible that I could've found time for CreateDebate if I had seen any NEW hot button topics...Everything has been repeated...My explanation of this is not that news isn't really happening...It's just that since Obama's in office is seems no one wants to question his plans..
I know there are many contributing factors to this lack in debates, but I believe in the one I just stated...
I am going to try to get more involved in this site(again)...So, as far as an allie goes, you can count on me! :)
hahaha...
It's funny because you are a referencing a debate that is somewhat similar to this very debate, how ironic!
The pasted comment was from my Rick Warren debate...That's fine, I was just trying to say that it is nearly impossible to create new arguments to the same debate...
However, I am complaining about the repetitive nature of the debates on CreateDebate...Regardless to how well thought out an argument is, that doesn't change the fact that you could practically copy and paste your arguments from previous debates....In fact, I have seen you do this in more than one debate...While Loudacris may have had a nice point it doesn't tackle the main question. I am not the only one tired of similar debates-that is obvious. Maybe what Loudacris should have mentioned is what he suggests for those debaters who are tired of copying and pasting arguments. I wasn't focusing on me in this debate, but the nature of CreateDebate...
GWB--You will be missed...
Sure, you mad some awful decisions...
Sure, you did nothing to help the economy...
but one thing is certain- You are an endless amount of entertainment and a stand-up guy..
Here's to you Bush....
It's over Kukla, no need for such abrasive language for a man who is bowing out with a nice little speech...
I wasn't sure about this until I did some research-
I have searched and searched-
no where can I find Barack directly opposing gay marriage...
He seemed to play neutral. He seemed to be afraid to directly speak out against gay marriage. If you can find Obama opposing gay rights COMPLETELY, let me know...
Until then, I am both proud and disappointed in Barack...
I love Rick's values, but Obama should have had the guts to avidly speak against gay rights.
Really?
Wow..
I can't stand the UK version...
Steve Carrell, Rainn Wilson, and John Krasinski, for me, create an unbelievably funny cast...
The humor is a different variation from the UK version..Which is to be expected with a conversion in the US...It has created a new sense of humor..If you create believable characters with believable situations in every episode what would become of US comedy???? The stupidity that Michael displays is hilarious. Dwight's beet farm and on again off again romance can't be wrote off as stupid comedy. You have to look at the bigger picture...
Plus, the UK characters are TOO believable. After awhile. they become boring and predictable..
Not yet he isn't!!! We have a few more days of technical paper work before Barack takes office...It is surely bitter sweet for me...I am glad to see ole' Bush out, but not so thrilled to see Obama in...
O well...
Gotta love the wabbit though..
=]
patriotism:
a devoted love, support, and defense of one’s country; national loyalty.
http://www.wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/
patriotism: love for or devotion to one's country
http://www.merriam-webster.com/
Patriotism is commonly defined as love of and/or devotion to one's country. The word comes from the Latin, patria, and Greek patritha.[1] However, "patriotism," or the love of one's country, has come to have different meanings over time. Thus, the meaning of patriotism can be highly dependent upon context, geography and philosophy.
Alright, although my argument that partioism=support is more supported, I can see where you are coming from..I suppose patriotism is relative, as many disagreements between democrats and republicans are...
Just because I make a negative comment against the president doesn't mean I'm not patriotic. However, it does make me less patriotic than others who don't...You say that it is equally patriotic to tear down our government? How so? Back up your statements. I just proved your satement that partiotism has nothing to do with support wrong. So, I really don't know your argument here.
Ok, tell me...Out of 10 people, 5 are conservatives, 5 are liberals...
Ask each one there opinion on the war...
the 5 conservatives say they are in favor of the war, and stand by the government
the 5 liberals say the government is so stupid that they put us in a war, and won't end it...
Now, who is going to support a war?
1. An older Veteran, who lives in North Carolina, fought for his country because he believes that America should always go to war with those who attack us...
OR
2. A working woman, who lives in Massachusetts, sees only that the government will be spending money to support a war...
Tell me, who's the conservative and who's the liberal...
I don't need numbers when I have common sense...
