Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    A test of Liberal Descriptive Accuracy...

    Liberals: tell me what you think the "political orientation" is of this commentator:


    "



    The week gone by has been incessant in its reminders of human depravity, the collectivization of which was a specialty of the century gone by. There were singular acts of cruelty in old Russia, and indeed in Bismarck’s Germany, but it required the resources of modern states to transform these into the Gulag of Stalin and the death camps of Hitler. A recent book tells of the infatuation of the author, as a six-year-old, with “Uncle Dolf,” back when Hitler could exhaust his passions by playing with little boys, leaving it to a later maturity to metastasize that inclination into playing to the death with millions of little boys, and big boys, and women of all ages. Mr. Jan Egeland, the United Nations emergency relief coordinator in eastern Congo, reports that bloodshed there is the worst current humanitarian crisis. The toll in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has amounted to “one tsunami every six months.” In December the tsunami killed 300,000 people.



    A U.N. report tells of the kidnapping of hundreds of civilians from rival ethnic groups; some are tortured, the rest are forced to work as porters or sex slaves. “Several witnesses,” according to Reuters, “reported cases of mutilation followed by death or decapitation.”

    Concurrently, Mr. Porter Goss, the head of our CIA, was reassuring Senator Carl Levin that the deaths of four prisoners in American custody in Iraq and Afghanistan were hideous abnormalities. “We don’t do torture,” Goss said; we draw the line at “professional interrogation.” A major reason for not engaging in torture, he explained, is that is that “torture is not productive,” whereas with professional interrogation we have had demonstrated successes in averting attacks and capturing terrorist suspects.

    We can, I think, accept that disavowal. As long as the kind of thing that happened at Abu Ghraib gets front-page attention and universal denunciation, bringing the perpetrators to trial and imprisonment, we are relatively chaste. But the question arises whether the United States and indeed the other western industrial democracies are working convincingly to elevate human cruelty to the rank of infamy, where it belongs.

    Consider the report last week in the New York Times, a feature on “A World of Ways to Say ‘Islamic Law.’” We read of the Sharia, which is the Islamic code of justice, and its concern for enforcing the law. One form of punishment against adulterers and the like is stoning — stoning the offender to death. But listen to a detail or two from the Iranian penal code: “The stones should not be too large so that the person dies on being hit by one or two of them; they should not be so small either that they could not be defined as stones.”

    In Iran, 11 women were condemned to be stoned to death over the last four years. But consider the alternative: It is flogging, often in public — 285 of these in a single year. A pretty conclusive sign of having crossed the Sharia, but not sufficiently to move to another stage of punishment, which is amputation. In Saudi Arabia, “amputation of the hand or foot is imposed for theft and burglary; highway robbery is punished by cross amputation.” That last means they chop off, say, the right hand and the left foot. In Saudi Arabia, “scores of teenage boys were reported flogged during the year 2002. A woman was sentenced to 65 lashes and six months’ imprisonment for committing adultery with her sister’s husband, even though she reportedly claimed that he had raped her. The man was sentenced to 4,700 lashes and six years’ imprisonment. At least seven people, all foreign nationals, had their right hands amputated.”

    The question before the house, in this neocon age, is: What should the United States attempt to do to protest these routine, and extra-routine, extravagances against human decency? If we are prepared to venture out to endorse revolutionary democracy, why aren’t we simultaneously singling out for reform such practices as here described?

    Perhaps democratic reform is what you need, to progress to the abolition of human torture. That is a responsible position, but it does not tell us that silence should be the rule when our allies set out to stone and to amputate. Polemicists shoot back at us that, after all, we Americans engage in capital punishment. “So’s-your-old-man” replies aren’t persuasive. To execute a first degree murderer by needle injection after approximately ten years of judicial and executive deliberation doesn’t constitute infamous behavior.

    But we watch what goes on in the Islamist world, and the tsunami-every-six months carnage of the Congo, and we are doing virtually nothing to protest it.


    "
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  2. #2
    ODN's Crotchety Old Man

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Location, Location
    Posts
    9,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A test of Liberal Descriptive Accuracy...

    North

  3. #3
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A test of Liberal Descriptive Accuracy...

    I meant: is s/he left, right, libertarian, Democrat, Republican, liberal, etc.
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  4. #4
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Sheffield, S.Yorks., UK
    Posts
    8,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A test of Liberal Descriptive Accuracy...

    CS - If you added that other option, 'CONFUSED'; I think most Brits. would tick that box!
    "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." - Anais Nin.
    Emitte lucem et veritatem - Send out light and truth.
    'Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt' - Julius Caesar (rough translation, 'Men will think what they want to think')
    Kill my boss? Do I dare live out the American dream? - Homer Simpson.

  5. #5
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Cleveland, or parts thereof
    Posts
    831
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A test of Liberal Descriptive Accuracy...

    Quote Originally Posted by Clive
    Liberals: tell me what you think the "political orientation" is of this commentator:
    Oh gee! I love these loaded questions...not only are they petty, but they also serve no actual point to any spirited debate, other than to demeane the other side and make one feel better....

    I'm guess s/he was verbose. Rather verbose. But I'm pretty sure it wasn't Micheal Moore, the phrase, "...because George W. Bush eats babies..." didn't appear at all.
    What is it like to be Libertarian and an Atheist? Imagine having the freedom to believe whatever you want, without the responsibility of it ever becoming accepted in the majority.

    It's a truly magical feeling. Equal parts happiness and depression.

  6. #6
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A test of Liberal Descriptive Accuracy...

    The week gone by has been incessant in its reminders of human depravity, the collectivization of which was a specialty of the century gone by. There were singular acts of cruelty in old Russia, and indeed in Bismarck’s Germany, but it required the resources of modern states to transform these into the Gulag of Stalin and the death camps of Hitler. A recent book tells of the infatuation of the author, as a six-year-old, with “Uncle Dolf,” back when Hitler could exhaust his passions by playing with little boys, leaving it to a later maturity to metastasize that inclination into playing to the death with millions of little boys, and big boys, and women of all ages.
    First impression: Double you tee eff?

    We go from the week gone by to talking about cruelty from last century to talking about "modern states" which could be 2005 modern or 1935 modern to talking about a book that may or may not be a work of fiction.

    So far, it's solidly depraved.

    Mr. Jan Egeland, the United Nations emergency relief coordinator in eastern Congo, reports that bloodshed there is the worst current humanitarian crisis. The toll in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has amounted to “one tsunami every six months.” In December the tsunami killed 300,000 people.
    There's no snipes at the U.N. here. That's one point towards liberal.

    A U.N. report tells of the kidnapping of hundreds of civilians from rival ethnic groups; some are tortured, the rest are forced to work as porters or sex slaves. “Several witnesses,” according to Reuters, “reported cases of mutilation followed by death or decapitation.”
    Again, I would see a conservative writing as being more critical of the U.N.'s ability (or lack there of) to do something about these atrocities. Still one point towards liberal.

    Concurrently, Mr. Porter Goss, the head of our CIA, was reassuring Senator Carl Levin that the deaths of four prisoners in American custody in Iraq and Afghanistan were hideous abnormalities. “We don’t do torture,” Goss said; we draw the line at “professional interrogation.” A major reason for not engaging in torture, he explained, is that is that “torture is not productive,” whereas with professional interrogation we have had demonstrated successes in averting attacks and capturing terrorist suspects.

    We can, I think, accept that disavowal. As long as the kind of thing that happened at Abu Ghraib gets front-page attention and universal denunciation, bringing the perpetrators to trial and imprisonment, we are relatively chaste. But the question arises whether the United States and indeed the other western industrial democracies are working convincingly to elevate human cruelty to the rank of infamy, where it belongs.
    Now we're talking about torture perpetuated by Americans. Very close to center. We mention Porter Goss and his attitude towards torture. The article is not approving of it, but neither is it condemning it. We end with the sentiment of elevating human cruelty to the rank of infamy. A conservative commentator would have taken a stronger side towards Goss and may have mentioned why it is important to hold captives / interrogate them. Another point towards liberal.

    Liberal : 2.0


    Consider the report last week in the New York Times, a feature on “A World of Ways to Say ‘Islamic Law.’” We read of the Sharia, which is the Islamic code of justice, and its concern for enforcing the law. One form of punishment against adulterers and the like is stoning — stoning the offender to death. But listen to a detail or two from the Iranian penal code: “The stones should not be too large so that the person dies on being hit by one or two of them; they should not be so small either that they could not be defined as stones.”
    Uhm... what? We go from talking about atrocities to prisoner interrogation / abuse to... Islamic... law... concerning... stoning...

    Another point for depraved.

    Liberal 2.0
    Deprave 2.0

    In Iran, 11 women were condemned to be stoned to death over the last four years. But consider the alternative: It is flogging, often in public — 285 of these in a single year. A pretty conclusive sign of having crossed the Sharia, but not sufficiently to move to another stage of punishment, which is amputation. In Saudi Arabia, “amputation of the hand or foot is imposed for theft and burglary; highway robbery is punished by cross amputation.” That last means they chop off, say, the right hand and the left foot. In Saudi Arabia, “scores of teenage boys were reported flogged during the year 2002. A woman was sentenced to 65 lashes and six months’ imprisonment for committing adultery with her sister’s husband, even though she reportedly claimed that he had raped her. The man was sentenced to 4,700 lashes and six years’ imprisonment. At least seven people, all foreign nationals, had their right hands amputated.”
    Meh... could go either way at this point. The conservatives of the country have all seemed pretty eager to paint fundamental islamic regions as inhuman and liberals have always been pro-geneva convention / pro-human rights / against cruel / unusual punishment.

    Liberal 2.0
    Depraved 2.0


    The question before the house, in this neocon age, is: What should the United States attempt to do to protest these routine, and extra-routine, extravagances against human decency? If we are prepared to venture out to endorse revolutionary democracy, why aren’t we simultaneously singling out for reform such practices as here described?
    The word "neocon" smacks of liberalism. +1 to liberal. However, the idea of helping suffering people in other countries could be either.

    Liberal 3.0
    Depraved 2.0

    Perhaps democratic reform is what you need, to progress to the abolition of human torture.
    Enforcing democracy. Patently conservative.

    Liberal 2.0
    Depraved 2.0

    That is a responsible position, but it does not tell us that silence should be the rule when our allies set out to stone and to amputate. Polemicists shoot back at us that, after all, we Americans engage in capital punishment. “So’s-your-old-man” replies aren’t persuasive. To execute a first degree murderer by needle injection after approximately ten years of judicial and executive deliberation doesn’t constitute infamous behavior.
    Not much of an attack against the death penalty. A liberal commentator would have had stronger words. +1 conservative.

    Liberal 1.0
    Depraved 2.0

    But we watch what goes on in the Islamist world, and the tsunami-every-six months carnage of the Congo, and we are doing virtually nothing to protest it.

    Overall, I'm going to have to go with... depraved. It's an article that, without context of author, title, or publication, has sentiments of both conservatives and liberals in it. It doesn't seem like a very well crafted article...

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A test of Liberal Descriptive Accuracy...

    Oh gee! I love these loaded questions...not only are they petty, but they also serve no actual point to any spirited debate, other than to demeane the other side and make one feel better....
    I'm not asking who wrote it. I'm asking what adjective best characterizes this person's political views, as espoused in this essay. How is it loaded? I'm asking you to tell me where you think this person's views fall.
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  8. #8
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Cleveland, or parts thereof
    Posts
    831
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A test of Liberal Descriptive Accuracy...

    How is it loaded? I'm asking you to tell me where you think this person's views fall.
    Liberals: tell me what you think the "political orientation" is of this commentator:
    Starting it with "Liberals"...and putting "political orientation" in quotes makes me very wary of it. Pardon me if I'm wrong, I meant no disrespect to you. I still remember Apok and the "How many Liberals can say..." thread.
    What is it like to be Libertarian and an Atheist? Imagine having the freedom to believe whatever you want, without the responsibility of it ever becoming accepted in the majority.

    It's a truly magical feeling. Equal parts happiness and depression.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Is the Bible 100% the word of God?
    By AntiMaterialist in forum Religion
    Replies: 487
    Last Post: April 14th, 2007, 02:31 PM
  2. Split test.
    By Fyshhed in forum Test Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 19th, 2004, 01:51 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •