CDZ Is it time to create a new thread, "Honesty"?

[Wry Catcher]

It really is time for honesty, a forum which requires every post on every issue to provide probative evidence that what they posted is true, and the powers that be choose the standard they feel best supports honesty, to wit:

Legal Standards are those standards that are set forth in governmental laws. Ethical standards are based on the human principles of right and wrong. Something can be legal but not ethical.

There is no doubt that Ethical Standards hold the truth as good, and a lie bad. It is really that simple, that the Internet in general, and this message board in particular, has members who are honest and who are liars.

I do not and will not suggest censorship. I support allowing the White Nationalists to make their case overtly, and let Black Lives Matter do the same; let the anti Semites make their case, and the Jews make theirs; let the liberals and the conservatives, let the Democrats, let the Republicans, the Libertarians the Greens and the anarchists to speak their mind and explain how they would govern or be governed.

 

[martybegan]

It really is time for honesty, a forum which requires every post on every issue to provide probative evidence that what they posted is true, and the powers that be choose the standard they feel best supports honesty, to wit:

Legal Standards are those standards that are set forth in governmental laws. Ethical standards are based on the human principles of right and wrong. Something can be legal but not ethical.

There is no doubt that Ethical Standards hold the truth as good, and a lie bad. It is really that simple, that the Internet in general, and this message board in particular has members who are honest and who are liars.

I do not and will not suggest censorship. I support allowing the White Nationalists to make their case overtly, and let Black Lives Matter do the same; let the anti Semites make their case, the the Jews make theirs; let the liberals and the conservatives, let the Democrats, the Republicans, the Libertarians the Greens and the anarchists speak their mind and explain how they would govern or be governed. others.

The problem is most people replace opinion for fact, or try to create factual arguments over something that is really opinion.

Saying "that ball is blue" is something easy to judge on a factual basis, and to determine the truth or a lie when a person says "that ball is red", or "that isn't a ball it's a howitzer"

One also has to be honest to oneself to be truthful, as people are incredibly able to believe in falsehoods, or to ignore obvious evidence that interrupts their narrative.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Was it ethical to lynch Kavanaugh on unfounded unproven obvious lies? Just curious?

 

[chops_]

Although, we all insert links from various sites; how can we be certain "they" are factual. The sources like Fox News, CNN, etc.

Although, we like to believe they are accurate and factual; you can't pass anything. Especially, some of these are not always "honest" as they say they say.

Sure, it's easy for Fox News to say they "report" accurate news/stories. That doesn't necessarily mean they are "honest".

News sources such as The New York Times and Washington Posts like to "report" their stories/news as "factual". But in reality, they at times distort it to the point, they make it so believable. People seem to find them somehow still "credible" sources. So much so, how can they call themselves an "honest" news source, when they omit and edit their "news" at any given time? How honest is that?

 

[Leo123]

It really is time for honesty, a forum which requires every post on every issue to provide probative evidence that what they posted is true, and the powers that be choose the standard they feel best supports honesty, to wit:

Legal Standards are those standards that are set forth in governmental laws. Ethical standards are based on the human principles of right and wrong. Something can be legal but not ethical.

There is no doubt that Ethical Standards hold the truth as good, and a lie bad. It is really that simple, that the Internet in general, and this message board in particular, has members who are honest and who are liars.

I do not and will not suggest censorship. I support allowing the White Nationalists to make their case overtly, and let Black Lives Matter do the same; let the anti Semites make their case, and the Jews make theirs; let the liberals and the conservatives, let the Democrats, let the Republicans, the Libertarians the Greens and the anarchists to speak their mind and explain how they would govern or be governed.

Who's going to be the 'Truth Sheriff'

 

[Wry Catcher]

It really is time for honesty, a forum which requires every post on every issue to provide probative evidence that what they posted is true, and the powers that be choose the standard they feel best supports honesty, to wit:

Legal Standards are those standards that are set forth in governmental laws. Ethical standards are based on the human principles of right and wrong. Something can be legal but not ethical.

There is no doubt that Ethical Standards hold the truth as good, and a lie bad. It is really that simple, that the Internet in general, and this message board in particular has members who are honest and who are liars.

I do not and will not suggest censorship. I support allowing the White Nationalists to make their case overtly, and let Black Lives Matter do the same; let the anti Semites make their case, the the Jews make theirs; let the liberals and the conservatives, let the Democrats, the Republicans, the Libertarians the Greens and the anarchists speak their mind and explain how they would govern or be governed. others.

The problem is most people replace opinion for fact, or try to create factual arguments over something that is really opinion.

Saying "that ball is blue" is something easy to judge on a factual basis, and to determine the truth or a lie when a person says "that ball is red", or "that isn't a ball it's a howitzer"

One also has to be honest to oneself to be truthful, as people are incredibly able to believe in falsehoods, or to ignore obvious evidence that interrupts their narrative.

Well stated, thank you.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Was it ethical to lynch Kavanaugh on unfounded unproven obvious lies? Just curious?

This is the Clean Zone. You've offered an opinion, but there is no probative evidence that Judge Kavanaugh was metaphorically lynched or that Dr. Ford's testimony was not true.

Be like Marty, who I rarely (almost always) disagree with, who posted a comment substantive and thought provoking.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It really is time for honesty, a forum which requires every post on every issue to provide probative evidence that what they posted is true, and the powers that be choose the standard they feel best supports honesty, to wit:

Legal Standards are those standards that are set forth in governmental laws. Ethical standards are based on the human principles of right and wrong. Something can be legal but not ethical.

There is no doubt that Ethical Standards hold the truth as good, and a lie bad. It is really that simple, that the Internet in general, and this message board in particular, has members who are honest and who are liars.

I do not and will not suggest censorship. I support allowing the White Nationalists to make their case overtly, and let Black Lives Matter do the same; let the anti Semites make their case, and the Jews make theirs; let the liberals and the conservatives, let the Democrats, let the Republicans, the Libertarians the Greens and the anarchists to speak their mind and explain how they would govern or be governed.

Who's going to be the 'Truth Sheriff'

This is the clean zone, the truth always rises, falsehoods will fade away.

Post your values and principles, and how they would govern and how you would like to be governed is all that is asked.

Postscript: A lies can be challenged by the Mods, or another post which provides probative evidence that what was stated was a lie.

 

[MarcATL]

Was it ethical to lynch Kavanaugh on unfounded unproven obvious lies? Just curious?

This is an opinion.

NEXT!!!!

 

[Mac1958]

"Truth" and facts and opinion have become completely blurred in this society.

Hence the division we're seeing. We're all wandering around in our own little bubbles of reality.

And expecting intellectual honesty on a political internet message board is, at best, naive.
.

 

[Leo123]

It really is time for honesty, a forum which requires every post on every issue to provide probative evidence that what they posted is true, and the powers that be choose the standard they feel best supports honesty, to wit:

Legal Standards are those standards that are set forth in governmental laws. Ethical standards are based on the human principles of right and wrong. Something can be legal but not ethical.

There is no doubt that Ethical Standards hold the truth as good, and a lie bad. It is really that simple, that the Internet in general, and this message board in particular, has members who are honest and who are liars.

I do not and will not suggest censorship. I support allowing the White Nationalists to make their case overtly, and let Black Lives Matter do the same; let the anti Semites make their case, and the Jews make theirs; let the liberals and the conservatives, let the Democrats, let the Republicans, the Libertarians the Greens and the anarchists to speak their mind and explain how they would govern or be governed.

Who's going to be the 'Truth Sheriff'

This is the clean zone, the truth always rises, falsehoods will fade away.

Post your values and principles, and how they would govern and how you would like to be governed is all that is asked.

Postscript: A lies can be challenged by the Mods, or another post which provides probative evidence that what was stated was a lie.

Values and principles are opinions especially when it comes to politics and, after all, this is a political forum. So I ask again, who is going to be "Truth-Sheriff."

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Was it ethical to lynch Kavanaugh on unfounded unproven obvious lies? Just curious?

This is the Clean Zone. You've offered an opinion, but there is no probative evidence that Judge Kavanaugh was metaphorically lynched or that Dr. Ford's testimony was not true.

Be like Marty, who I rarely (almost always) disagree with, who posted a comment substantive and thought provoking.

Actually we have Ford on 3 bald faced lies and her testimony to the attack flies in the face of what she told her shrink in 2012, then there were 4 boys not 2 and none of them were named.

 

[boedicca]

IMO, anyone who thinks we need to have a thread labelled "Honesty" to be honest has the same ethical deficit as Google with its (now abandoned) "don't be evil" motto.

 

[OldLady]

"Truth" and facts and opinion have become completely blurred in this society.

Hence the division we're seeing. We're all wandering around in our own little bubbles of reality.

And expecting intellectual honesty on a political internet message board is, at best, naive.
.

Mac, you are too pessimistic. Are you able to rise to the level of telling the truth? Me, too. So it is certainly possible. Don't be an Eeyore, okay?

 

[OldLady]

It really is time for honesty, a forum which requires every post on every issue to provide probative evidence that what they posted is true, and the powers that be choose the standard they feel best supports honesty, to wit:

Legal Standards are those standards that are set forth in governmental laws. Ethical standards are based on the human principles of right and wrong. Something can be legal but not ethical.

There is no doubt that Ethical Standards hold the truth as good, and a lie bad. It is really that simple, that the Internet in general, and this message board in particular, has members who are honest and who are liars.

I do not and will not suggest censorship. I support allowing the White Nationalists to make their case overtly, and let Black Lives Matter do the same; let the anti Semites make their case, and the Jews make theirs; let the liberals and the conservatives, let the Democrats, let the Republicans, the Libertarians the Greens and the anarchists to speak their mind and explain how they would govern or be governed.

Who's going to be the 'Truth Sheriff'

This is the clean zone, the truth always rises, falsehoods will fade away.

Post your values and principles, and how they would govern and how you would like to be governed is all that is asked.

Postscript: A lies can be challenged by the Mods, or another post which provides probative evidence that what was stated was a lie.

Values and principles are opinions especially when it comes to politics and, after all, this is a political forum. So I ask again, who is going to be "Truth-Sheriff."

What about reputable sources or one of the fact checker sites?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It really is time for honesty, a forum which requires every post on every issue to provide probative evidence that what they posted is true, and the powers that be choose the standard they feel best supports honesty, to wit:

Legal Standards are those standards that are set forth in governmental laws. Ethical standards are based on the human principles of right and wrong. Something can be legal but not ethical.

There is no doubt that Ethical Standards hold the truth as good, and a lie bad. It is really that simple, that the Internet in general, and this message board in particular, has members who are honest and who are liars.

I do not and will not suggest censorship. I support allowing the White Nationalists to make their case overtly, and let Black Lives Matter do the same; let the anti Semites make their case, and the Jews make theirs; let the liberals and the conservatives, let the Democrats, let the Republicans, the Libertarians the Greens and the anarchists to speak their mind and explain how they would govern or be governed.

Who's going to be the 'Truth Sheriff'

This is the clean zone, the truth always rises, falsehoods will fade away.

Post your values and principles, and how they would govern and how you would like to be governed is all that is asked.

Postscript: A lies can be challenged by the Mods, or another post which provides probative evidence that what was stated was a lie.

Values and principles are opinions especially when it comes to politics and, after all, this is a political forum. So I ask again, who is going to be "Truth-Sheriff."

What about reputable sources or one of the fact checker sites?

Most of the supposed FACT checker sites are HIGHLY biased and not actually accurate. As for reliable sources that is in the eye of the beholder. What I REALLY love is when you post a well known fact and some dumb ass liberal demands a link to it in a delaying tactic.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Although, we all insert links from various sites; how can we be certain "they" are factual. The sources like Fox News, CNN, etc.

Although, we like to believe they are accurate and factual; you can't pass anything. Especially, some of these are not always "honest" as they say they say.

Sure, it's easy for Fox News to say they "report" accurate news/stories. That doesn't necessarily mean they are "honest".

News sources such as The New York Times and Washington Posts like to "report" their stories/news as "factual". But in reality, they at times distort it to the point, they make it so believable. People seem to find them somehow still "credible" sources. So much so, how can they call themselves an "honest" news source, when they omit and edit their "news" at any given time? How honest is that?

Agreed, most single sources need to be verified by the reader. When credible sources conflict with the linik, more needs to be investigated and reported out.

 

[Doc1]

Was it ethical to lynch Kavanaugh on unfounded unproven obvious lies? Just curious?

This is the Clean Zone. You've offered an opinion, but there is no probative evidence that Judge Kavanaugh was metaphorically lynched or that Dr. Ford's testimony was not true.

Be like Marty, who I rarely (almost always) disagree with, who posted a comment substantive and thought provoking.

The lack of corroboration disproves the allegations of Ford. You really don't want "honesty" you want to preach abut what you "think" honesty is.

 

[MarathonMike]

It isn't enough to "provide a link" IMO for factual support of your claim. They are all biased. When I research things I rarely go to the major US news sources since they are very biased. I'll go to less prominent outlets or even foreign sources to corroborate a story. It is really difficult to get at the truth since everyone is on a hair trigger to shoot down the other side. You have to let the dust settle and check multiple sources and DON'T BELIEVE the talking heads on TV until you do.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Was it ethical to lynch Kavanaugh on unfounded unproven obvious lies? Just curious?

This is the Clean Zone. You've offered an opinion, but there is no probative evidence that Judge Kavanaugh was metaphorically lynched or that Dr. Ford's testimony was not true.

Be like Marty, who I rarely (almost always) disagree with, who posted a comment substantive and thought provoking.

The lack of corroboration disproves the allegations of Ford. You really don't want "honesty" you want to preach abut what you "think" honesty is.

This is the clean zone, either lay off the personal attacks or go away. For the record, the FBI did not interview all of the parties of interest.