POLL: Are there two sides to every story?

[Mac1958]

Let's look at the biggest issues that receive attention today. Do you believe that, for each of the following issues, there are (at least) two sides to every story that deserve consideration, legitimacy and respectful debate?

• Foreign Policy
• War
• Income Taxes
• Macroeconomics
  
• Business/Finance Regulation
• Gay Rights
• Civil Rights
  
• Abortion

Or do you believe that the other side's opinion on any or all of the above issues does not deserve exposure?

And please expand on your poll response, thanks.

.

 

[LoneLaugher]

All opinions deserve exposure.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Can't answer your poll. It depends on the arguments being put forward. Need more poll options rather than just the black & white ones you offered.

 

[Preacher]

There are always at least 2 opinions whether the differing opinion deserves my time energy or even consideration is another thing all together.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Let's look at the biggest issues that receive attention today. Do you believe that, for each of the following issues, there are (at least) two sides to every story that deserve consideration, legitimacy and respectful debate?

• Foreign Policy
• War
• Income Taxes
• Macroeconomics
  
• Business/Finance Regulation
• Gay Rights
• Civil Rights
  
• Abortion

Or do you believe that the other side's opinion on any or all of the above issues does not deserve exposure?

And please expand on your poll response, thanks.

.

Two side, there are about 28 usually but let's put it to a simple test eh, what would you prefer, war or no war? Civil rights or no civil rights? Abortion or no, and no need for, abortion?

War now or war later tends to be the debate here, not war or no war. How you frame the question changes the debate greatly, and the validity of the other side...

 

[The Rabbi]

All opinions deserve exposure.

Some of them deserve to be exposed for the frauds and propaganda they are.

 

[eagle7_31]

Let's look at the biggest issues that receive attention today. Do you believe that, for each of the following issues, there are (at least) two sides to every story that deserve consideration, legitimacy and respectful debate?

• Foreign Policy
• War
• Income Taxes
• Macroeconomics
  
• Business/Finance Regulation
• Gay Rights
• Civil Rights
  
• Abortion

Or do you believe that the other side's opinion on any or all of the above issues does not deserve exposure?

And please expand on your poll response, thanks.

.

there are two sides. Problem is the lunatic left (and right) don't see it that way.

 

[Sonny Clark]

There are different views and opinions on just about every issue that one could name. And, everyone has the right to express their opinion. No one should be silenced.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Riveting!

 

[Freewill]

I voted yes because I want the other side heard but that does not mean they have a legitimate point.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I voted yes because I want the other side heard but that does not mean they have a legitimate point.

I could not vote yes because of the wording. Often both sides DO NOT have legitimate positions.

 

[Freewill]

I voted yes because I want the other side heard but that does not mean they have a legitimate point.

I could not vote yes because of the wording. Often both sides DO NOT have legitimate positions.

The wording was bad, most time both sides can't be right or have legitimate positions.

 

[AquaAthena]

Let's look at the biggest issues that receive attention today. Do you believe that, for each of the following issues, there are (at least) two sides to every story that deserve consideration, legitimacy and respectful debate?

• Foreign Policy
• War
• Income Taxes
• Macroeconomics
  
• Business/Finance Regulation
• Gay Rights
• Civil Rights
  
• Abortion

Or do you believe that the other side's opinion on any or all of the above issues does not deserve exposure?

And please expand on your poll response, thanks.

.

Are there two sides to every story

There are always two or more sides to every story if more than one person is involved.

"We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."

 

[Mac1958]

Can't answer your poll. It depends on the arguments being put forward. Need more poll options rather than just the black & white ones you offered.

I think we all know what traditional arguments are for each of the issues listed.

.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Do you believe that, for each of the following issues, there are (at least) two sides to every story that deserve consideration, legitimacy and respectful debate?

Yes, I do, which is why I try to practice that here myself.

While I might disagree I will never try to shout anyone down.

The legitimacy of the positions depends upon the veracity of the sources. If they lack credibility then that too deserves to be considered because it factors into my own decision as to which position to adopt.

Let me use the example of war.

When the prior administration decided to join with NATO and take out ALQ in Afghanistan I supported that effort because it was plausible to make a credible case that they posed a legitimate threat.

However when they subsequently decided to invade Iraq it was patently obvious that they didn't have a legitimate, or even a credible, case and were just fearmongering in order to incite an illegal war.

So in that instance I was on both sides of the issue of war and it largely depended upon the credibility of the threat that made me decide which position to take.

Others may differ in their opinions on those two cited instances but it does highlight the point in your OP that all sides of every story do deserve to be heard in a respectful debate.

 

[Mac1958]

Often both sides DO NOT have legitimate positions.

Examples?

.

 

[Plasmaball]

no, we have been over and over and over subjects long enough to know the sides. Not everyone should be treated as equal. This is part of the problem, everyone wants a trophy for giving out their shit opinion. No sometimes your thought is just a loser and should be treated as such. We used to respect experts in the field. Now everyone is an expert.

So no say something stupid, get called on it.

 

[Mac1958]

no, we have been over and over and over subjects long enough to know the sides. Not everyone should be treated as equal. This is part of the problem, everyone wants a trophy for giving out their shit opinion. No sometimes your thought is just a loser and should be treated as such. We used to respect experts in the field. Now everyone is an expert.

So no say something stupid, get called on it.

Who is to decide who and what are legitimate?

.

 

[Freewill]

Do you believe that, for each of the following issues, there are (at least) two sides to every story that deserve consideration, legitimacy and respectful debate?

Yes, I do, which is why I try to practice that here myself.

While I might disagree I will never try to shout anyone down.

The legitimacy of the positions depends upon the veracity of the sources. If they lack credibility then that too deserves to be considered because it factors into my own decision as to which position to adopt.

Let me use the example of war.

When the prior administration decided to join with NATO and take out ALQ in Afghanistan I supported that effort because it was plausible to make a credible case that they posed a legitimate threat.

However when they subsequently decided to invade Iraq it was patently obvious that they didn't have a legitimate, or even a credible, case and were just fearmongering in order to incite an illegal war.

So in that instance I was on both sides of the issue of war and it largely depended upon the credibility of the threat that made me decide which position to take.

Others may differ in their opinions on those two cited instances but it does highlight the point in your OP that all sides of every story do deserve to be heard in a respectful debate.

Good example of liberal thinking.

Afghanistan, what possible threat did they pose to the US? Was the Taliban responsible for 9/11? Did they threaten our interests in any way?

Iraq, did they threaten our interests when they invaded Kwait and then set the oil fields on fire as they retreated? Did they threaten our security by paying money to the family of suicide bombers? Did they not attack the US in the no fly zone? And if Afghanistan was a legal war what made Iraq an illegal war?

 

[Statistikhengst]

All opinions deserve exposure.

Some of them deserve to be exposed for the frauds and propaganda they are.

Yes, we do that with Rrraging Rrrightie opinions day and night.