Devil's Advocate Thread

[BonosSaint]

Just an intellectual exercise. Make a good argument for a position opposite one you hold and, if you dare, one you hold dear.

 

[Angela Harlem]

OK, I support the death penalty because I do not believe that the guilty should be allowed to live. I believe that there is nothing at all wrong about issuing an elected official the authority and power to remove our right to life. I believe elected officials are capable of using their discretion as I after all had the confidence to vote them in, so I extend that confidence even further to life and death decision making. I am comfortable with this entirely. My trust in the men of my government is strong enough to allow me to be comfortable with this. I am therefore confident with whom they elect for the bench of our high court, to likewise engage in such decision making.

I also support the courts serving the needs of victims, and doing so on a personal level with those who come before it. I see the courts role as one of meting out justice - and that is primarily for the victim of crime. I don't see the death penalty as vengeance, but instead equality among offense and punishment.

I do believe, despite objection, that it deters further crime. I also disagree that a life term is any kind of suitable punishment. Inmates are notoriously well looked after with such luxuries as televisions and toasters. I think this fails it's claimed initial purpose as removing freedoms, and instead it removes freedoms but makes it a nice holiday because they have books and education. I am not interested in the primary goal of prison which is to remove freedoms, and that a toaster oven makes little difference to the every day life of a convicted person. I see imprisonment as nothing to do with a penalty at all, despite the endless supply of data that suggest otherwise.

I believe that God/Jesus supports an eye for an eye, and I endeavour to use this to shape my view on the death penalty. I am absolutely not afraid of the concept of a religious ruling state.

 

[AchtungBono]

OK, I support the death penalty because I do not believe that the guilty should be allowed to live. I believe that there is nothing at all wrong about issuing an elected official the authority and power to remove our right to life. I believe elected officials are capable of using their discretion as I after all had the confidence to vote them in, so I extend that confidence even further to life and death decision making. I am comfortable with this entirely. My trust in the men of my government is strong enough to allow me to be comfortable with this. I am therefore confident with whom they elect for the bench of our high court, to likewise engage in such decision making.

I also support the courts serving the needs of victims, and doing so on a personal level with those who come before it. I see the courts role as one of meting out justice - and that is primarily for the victim of crime. I don't see the death penalty as vengeance, but instead equality among offense and punishment.

I do believe, despite objection, that it deters further crime. I also disagree that a life term is any kind of suitable punishment. Inmates are notoriously well looked after with such luxuries as televisions and toasters. I think this fails it's claimed initial purpose as removing freedoms, and instead it removes freedoms but makes it a nice holiday because they have books and education. I am not interested in the primary goal of prison which is to remove freedoms, and that a toaster oven makes little difference to the every day life of a convicted person. I see imprisonment as nothing to do with a penalty at all, despite the endless supply of data that suggest otherwise.

I believe that God/Jesus supports an eye for an eye, and I endeavour to use this to shape my view on the death penalty. I am absolutely not afraid of the concept of a religious ruling state.

I agree 100%.

 

[phillyfan26]

I agree 100%.

Do you understand what she was doing there?

 

[AchtungBono]

I am TOTALLY against so-called "mercy killings" which is just another word for cold-blooded murder.

Only G-d has the right to decide who lives and who dies, not the doctors.

The horrific murder of Terry Schiavo really drove the point home for me - a living breathing human being slowly starved to death at the whim of her monster of a husband....or ex-husband as the case may be seeing as he was already shacked up with someone else.

There are advances in medical science all the time and I believe that people should NEVER give up hope for recovery. I've heard stories about people waking up after YEARS in a coma - what would have happened if those people had been killed by their families?

You may ask why I'm against "mercy killings" yet I support the death penalty.....well one doesn't contradict the other. I don't equate John Couey with Terry Schiavo. John Couey raped a 9 year old girl and then buried her alive....THAT to me deserves the death penalty (which is actually too GOOD for that scum), Terry Schiavo's only "crime" was being in a coma - she didn't deserve to die for that.

 

[trevster2k]

I think the war in Iraq was the greatest presidential decision ever. It has made America safer, and opened the door for the democratization of the Middle East.

George Bush is the greatest president ever. His unsteely nerve has allowed him to make the hard decisions which make the world a better place and help others around the world. The Bush administration only has the best interests of all people in mind when making decisions.

History will refer to George W Bush as one of the greatest leaders of the 21st century.


( I think I am going to go throw up now............... )

 

[phillyfan26]

Devil's Advocate on ... Homosexual Rights

Why should homosexuals have the same rights as heterosexuals? Marriage has never been between anything else other than a man and a woman. Why should that change now?

I mean, after all, homosexuality is wrong. It says so in the Bible. The government shouldn't allow it at all. Forget the fact that the Bible has to do with religion: it's allowing sin.

Homosexuals don't deserve the same rights as I do as a heterosexual. I mean, after all, I can produce children. I continue evolution. What do homosexuals do? Just fool around with each other. And they should get rights?

And forget about letting them adopt children. They'll just feminize them. I mean, the only reason kids become gay is because of parental upbringing. Weak fathers. And lust for other men. They'd just pass on their homosexuality.

I always hear about how it's not a choice. But if it really isn't (though this is disputed cause one doctor said something about how they're not certain), they should just ignore their feelings and be a real human.

They don't even want to get married really. I mean, read the Conservapedia article on same-sex marriage. The one expert says that they just want to trample on marriage and its sanctity. I mean, it's true, you know? Heterosexual marriage has sanctity, cause we can have kids. Homosexuals can't. They just lust. They sin. And they don't deserve rights.

 

[melon]

I won't participate in this, if only because I'm afraid someone will actually use my "Devil's Advocate" arguments against my actual beliefs later.

 

[Vincent Vega]

I am TOTALLY against so-called "mercy killings" which is just another word for cold-blooded murder.

Only G-d has the right to decide who lives and who dies, not the doctors.

The horrific murder of Terry Schiavo really drove the point home for me - a living breathing human being slowly starved to death at the whim of her monster of a husband....or ex-husband as the case may be seeing as he was already shacked up with someone else.

There are advances in medical science all the time and I believe that people should NEVER give up hope for recovery. I've heard stories about people waking up after YEARS in a coma - what would have happened if those people had been killed by their families?

You may ask why I'm against "mercy killings" yet I support the death penalty.....well one doesn't contradict the other. I don't equate John Couey with Terry Schiavo. John Couey raped a 9 year old girl and then buried her alive....THAT to me deserves the death penalty (which is actually too GOOD for that scum), Terry Schiavo's only "crime" was being in a coma - she didn't deserve to die for that.

The point actually was to write the opposite from your opinion, but nevermind.

But what I've meant to ask you for quite a while: Why do you always write G-d instead of God? Is it just a letter which my browser interpretates wrong or is it to indicate that you are of another religion (being non-Protestant)?
No criticism, just something I was curious about.

 

[BonosSaint]

.......

 

[Irvine511]

IThe horrific murder of Terry Schiavo really drove the point home for me - a living breathing human being slowly starved to death at the whim of her monster of a husband....or ex-husband as the case may be seeing as he was already shacked up with someone else.

There are advances in medical science all the time and I believe that people should NEVER give up hope for recovery. I've heard stories about people waking up after YEARS in a coma - what would have happened if those people had been killed by their families?

you realize, of course, that the autopsy showed that most of her brain had liquified and she was every bit the vegetable the doctors said that she was.

her family was wrong. 100% wrong. there was nothing more there than wishful thinking. they'd be just as well served going to the refridgerator, taking out a head of caluiflower, putting make up on it and putting balloon in front of it and videotaping the whole thing.

 

[Irvine511]

see, i'm confused about this thread.

do i take a Devils Advocate for a position i hold where i can see 100% the other side, or am i trying to find the logic in a position i disagree with and have trouble articulating the other side?

 

[BonosSaint]

2nd is preferable. But the first will suffice. The challenge is to articulate it as convincingly as possible. The way you would argue it if you believed it, not necessarily the way they would argue it.

 

[INDY500]

Devil's Advocate on ... Homosexual Rights

Why should homosexuals have the same rights as heterosexuals? Marriage has never been between anything else other than a man and a woman. Why should that change now?

I mean, after all, homosexuality is wrong. It says so in the Bible. The government shouldn't allow it at all. Forget the fact that the Bible has to do with religion: it's allowing sin.

Homosexuals don't deserve the same rights as I do as a heterosexual. I mean, after all, I can produce children. I continue evolution. What do homosexuals do? Just fool around with each other. And they should get rights?

And forget about letting them adopt children. They'll just feminize them. I mean, the only reason kids become gay is because of parental upbringing. Weak fathers. And lust for other men. They'd just pass on their homosexuality.

I always hear about how it's not a choice. But if it really isn't (though this is disputed cause one doctor said something about how they're not certain), they should just ignore their feelings and be a real human.

They don't even want to get married really. I mean, read the Conservapedia article on same-sex marriage. The one expert says that they just want to trample on marriage and its sanctity. I mean, it's true, you know? Heterosexual marriage has sanctity, cause we can have kids. Homosexuals can't. They just lust. They sin. And they don't deserve rights.

Hater! Homophobe!

(oh yeah, this is a lot easier)

 

[anitram]

I think we should evangelize 24/7.

This is what we are instructed to do by God. If you saw a starving man on the street, would you not offer to feed him? If you saw somebody unemployed and you knew you could put them in a training program, would you not make that offer?

We are in dereliction of duty if we don't tell them about Jesus, and how if they don't embrace him, the little man with the pitchfork is comin' round. God will judge us harshly if we don't spread the word.

 

[melon]

Hater! Homophobe!

(oh yeah, this is a lot easier)

Come on, guys, it came from "The New Republic"! It's like quoting from God Himself.

I mean, as a born-again heterosexual, alcoholic, drug addicted divorced father of three children, I have a vested and personal interest to stop homosexuals from getting married. Because if I can't blame the gays, who can I blame for all my problems then?

 

[indra]

2nd is preferable. But the first will suffice. The challenge is to articulate it as convincingly as possible. The way you would argue it if you believed it, not necessarily the way they would argue it.

I'll admit I find it very hard to "articulate it as convincingly as possible" positions I believe no sane person can possibly have (and I know there will be people who get their shorts in a bunch over that comment ), but I'm enjoying reading the posts by those who are trying.

 

[Liesje]

All abortions for any reason should be made illegal b/c that's cold blooded murder of God's precious children.

 

[phillyfan26]

Hater! Homophobe!

(oh yeah, this is a lot easier)

 

[melon]

Roll your eyes all you want, but it only strengthens my resolve. Tell me I'm right, and I'm happy, because it means that I have spread the truth to a believer. Tell me I'm wrong, and I'm happy, because it means that I have stood resolutely against the legions of hell before me.

There are two ways in this world: the right way and the wrong way. As a born-again Christian, I know for certain that I am "the right way," so if someone disagrees with me, then it just shows further evidence of Satan's strength in this fallen world.

You are either with me or against me. There is nothing in between.

 

[Dreadsox]

Just an intellectual exercise. Make a good argument for a position opposite one you hold and, if you dare, one you hold dear.

THis has been my career in this forum. Can I argue for something I believe in?

hEHE

 

[phillyfan26]

Roll your eyes all you want, but it only strengthens my resolve. Tell me I'm right, and I'm happy, because it means that I have spread the truth to a believer. Tell me I'm wrong, and I'm happy, because it means that I have stood resolutely against the legions of hell before me.

There are two ways in this world: the right way and the wrong way. As a born-again Christian, I know for certain that I am "the right way," so if someone disagrees with me, then it just shows further evidence of Satan's strength in this fallen world.

You are either with me or against me. There is nothing in between.

That's very good.

 

[melon]

That's very good.

Unbelievable. A study from the unbiased, non-partisan, "Fundamentalist Conservative Christian Creationist Republican Family Research Council," says that a steady increase in laughing has caused more babies in Germany to be spontaneously aborted as homosexual prostitute demon women.

I mean, they drew a fucking graph, for God's sake, so how can we not take it seriously? The librul media, of course, is always ignoring the real news out there. WorldNetDaily told me that Iraq is today's vacation paradise. I've never been there, but that's good enough for me! So between reporting that Iraq is a disaster and ignoring the aborted homosexual German demon girl babies, how can we trust the librul media?

 

[A_Wanderer]

Wow a chance to show my own condacending bias that I feel towards idiots.

 

[Vincent Vega]

And I thought that with the steadily growing heathenisation of the German population, East and West, our dear social values crumbled, leading to a heavy decrease in kraut consumption, which in turn caused happy late-late term abortions of homosexual demon girl babies to rise to never-seen-before heights.

You really can learn something from your great American Conservative Scientifical Research Branch.

 

[CTU2fan]

Geez melon is better at conservatism than the neo-cons are. Bravo (sort of)

 

[Vincent Vega]

I am a bit scared by Angela Harlem.

 

[melon]

Geez melon is better at conservatism than the neo-cons are. Bravo (sort of)

(If I took this seriously, I could do much better than a caricature of conservatism. But like I said earlier in this thread, I don't want to write a "Devil's advocate" argument that's so effective as to have it used against the causes I actually support!)

 

[INDY500]

Come on, guys, it came from "The New Republic"! It's like quoting from God Himself.

I mean, as a born-again heterosexual, alcoholic, drug addicted divorced father of three children, I have a vested and personal interest to stop homosexuals from getting married. Because if I can't blame the gays, who can I blame for all my problems then?

SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT THIS!

Martha

 

[Diemen]

I think if we're just going to use this thread to backhandedly insult those of the opposing viewpoint, it would be better off to just close it now.