A no vote has the appearance of partisanshipIn that case your answer would be No, there are not always two sides.Except you listed multiple topics. For instance I see two sides to gay marriage but not to taxes. Hence I couldn't vote.
.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A no vote has the appearance of partisanshipIn that case your answer would be No, there are not always two sides.Except you listed multiple topics. For instance I see two sides to gay marriage but not to taxes. Hence I couldn't vote.
.
Yeah, that's why I was careful in the issues I listed.Sometimes facts are facts and people seem to only want to argue. Take the Flat-Earth Society, for example..
Personally, I think both "ends" have perfectly reasonable and understandable points for each of the issues.
The question is only where the net preponderance of evidence lies, and that falls ultimately to opinion.
.
All opinions deserve exposure.
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?
Or do you believe that the other side's opinion on any or all of the above issues does not deserve exposure?
- Foreign Policy
- War
- Income Taxes
- Macroeconomics
- Business/Finance Regulation
- Gay Rights
- Civil Rights
- Abortion
And please expand on your poll response, thanks.
.
All opinions deserve exposure.
Here is fact bout you, you are a far left drone and was exposed as one long ago..
All opinions deserve exposure.
Here is fact bout you, you are a far left drone and was exposed as one long ago..
Were I?
I could not vote yes because of the wording. Often both sides DO NOT have legitimate positions.I voted yes because I want the other side heard but that does not mean they have a legitimate point.
So far, most say that both sides deserve to be heard, but not so much on whether the "other side" has legitimate points.
Interesting.
Yeah, that's why I was careful in the issues I listed.Sometimes facts are facts and people seem to only want to argue. Take the Flat-Earth Society, for example..
Personally, I think both "ends" have perfectly reasonable and understandable points for each of the issues.
The question is only where the net preponderance of evidence lies, and that falls ultimately to opinion.
.
Read his description of YES in the answer section dipshit.So far, most say that both sides deserve to be heard, but not so much on whether the "other side" has legitimate points.
Interesting.
How can you declare "the other side has/doesn't have legitimate points" if you haven't heard what they are?
that depends on who and how they are being discussedMy point is not which side is "right" - that will be subjective.A lot of it depends on how much weight you put on one thing or another.Yeah, that's why I was careful in the issues I listed.Sometimes facts are facts and people seem to only want to argue. Take the Flat-Earth Society, for example..
Personally, I think both "ends" have perfectly reasonable and understandable points for each of the issues.
The question is only where the net preponderance of evidence lies, and that falls ultimately to opinion.
.
Does a person's right to service outweigh another's right to religious beliefs? Different people will answer differently.
My question is whether the traditional arguments are legitimate, reasonable, worthy of honest discussion.
.
There's the liberal side...
And then the side supported with something other than emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.
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?
Or do you believe that the other side's opinion on any or all of the above issues does not deserve exposure?
- Foreign Policy
- War
- Income Taxes
- Macroeconomics
- Business/Finance Regulation
- Gay Rights
- Civil Rights
- Abortion
And please expand on your poll response, thanks.
.
Hard to generalize.My point is not which side is "right" - that will be subjective.A lot of it depends on how much weight you put on one thing or another.Yeah, that's why I was careful in the issues I listed.Sometimes facts are facts and people seem to only want to argue. Take the Flat-Earth Society, for example..
Personally, I think both "ends" have perfectly reasonable and understandable points for each of the issues.
The question is only where the net preponderance of evidence lies, and that falls ultimately to opinion.
.
Does a person's right to service outweigh another's right to religious beliefs? Different people will answer differently.
My question is whether the traditional arguments are legitimate, reasonable, worthy of honest discussion.
.
On most issues there aren't two sides, so I had to vote no.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?
Or do you believe that the other side's opinion on any or all of the above issues does not deserve exposure?
- Foreign Policy
- War
- Income Taxes
- Macroeconomics
- Business/Finance Regulation
- Gay Rights
- Civil Rights
- Abortion
And please expand on your poll response, thanks.
.
Many deserve "exposure" only so they can be ridiculed.All opinions deserve exposure.
Not yours apparentlyAll opinions deserve exposure.