Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on November 20, 2017, 10:58:45 AM
-
interesting times indeed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42047532
-
Very worrying as the far right mob are itching to take power!
-
So May could outlast Merkel.
-
Very worrying as the far right mob are itching to take power!
the far right have valid concerns , just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean you are right.
-
the far right have valid concerns , just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean you are right.
What concerns of the far right do you agree with?
-
the far right have valid concerns , just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean you are right.
I don't care if the far right have some valid concerns (what are they?), they are still pretty obnoxious and would cause serious damage to society if they ever got in power.
-
What concerns of the far right do you agree with?
I have no idea , I was making a point but feel free to jump on anything I say that you might be 'triggered' by. ;)
-
I have no idea , I was making a point but feel free to jump on anything I say that you might be 'triggered' by. ;)
I just asked you a question about your statement. That you have no idea about what you agree with the far right in Germany's concerns are having stated that you do, seems odd to talk about me being 'triggered'.
-
I just asked you a question about your statement. That you have no idea about what you agree with the far right in Germany's concerns are having stated that you do, seems odd to talk about me being 'triggered'.
where did I say that I agreed with any of their concerns ?
-
where did I say that I agreed with any of their concerns ?
When you said they had 'valid concerns'.
-
interesting times indeed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42047532
Possibly the FDP have taken note of the "reward" given by the UK electorate to the Lib Dems for doing the responsible thing in 2010?
-
When you said they had 'valid concerns'.
yes , they have valid concerns , I didn't say I valued them too . The concerns are theirs to value . The concerns do not belong to me . I do not own them . But I can observe !
saying that their concerns are wrong just because you don't like them is also wrong.
-
the far right have valid concerns , just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean you are right.
What sort of valid concerns?
-
What sort of valid concerns?
Following on from a discussion on LBC hosted by Maajid Nawaz the other day, don't pretty well all political systems share essentially the same concerns? The common good, a safe and stable society, prosperity and the like. People argue about politics not on the basis of the concerns, which seem to be more or less universal, but on the basis of the methods used to obtain them.
-
yes , they have valid concerns , I didn't say I valued them too . The concerns are theirs to value . The concerns do not belong to me . I do not own them . But I can observe !
saying that their concerns are wrong just because you don't like them is also wrong.
So if they are valid. i.e: having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent, what of their concerns do you think are sound?
-
Following on from a discussion on LBC hosted by Maajid Nawaz the other day, don't pretty well all political systems share essentially the same concerns? The common good, a safe and stable society, prosperity and the like. People argue about politics not on the basis of the concerns, which seem to be more or less universal, but on the basis of the methods used to obtain them.
So since all concerns are valid, none are able to be declared valid as any validation.
-
Possibly the FDP have taken note of the "reward" given by the UK electorate to the Lib Dems for doing the responsible thing in 2010?
And that will help them how?
-
So if they are valid. i.e: having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent, what of their concerns do you think are sound?
I haven't got a clue , I've already said that , its not the concerns that are important here , its the fact that they have them that is .
If you are unable to understand then I apologise , I must not be explaining this right
-
And that will help them how?
Save them from anniliation when the next election comes round & they will be given the blame.
-
I haven't got a clue , I've already said that , its not the concerns that are important here , its the fact that they have them that is .
If you are unable to understand then I apologise , I must not be explaining this right
So if you don't have a clue how to say they are 'valid' what does your statement that they are 'valid' mean?
-
I haven't got a clue , I've already said that , its not the concerns that are important here , its the fact that they have them that is .
If you are unable to understand then I apologise , I must not be explaining this right
If you haven't got a clue how do you know they are valid?
-
So if you don't have a clue how to say they are 'valid' what does your statement that they are 'valid' mean?
valid to THEM!
-
valid to THEM!
So Alan Burns arguments are valid. I.e. having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent?
-
So Alan Burns arguments are valid. I.e. having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent?
NO, because he deals in fairy tales you have used a non sequitur there NS
-
NO, because he deals in fairy tales you have used a non sequitur there NS
They are valid to him which was your position on judging far right arguments.
-
They are valid to him which was your position on judging far right arguments.
I haven't judged any far right arguments
-
I haven't judged any far right arguments
You said they had valid concerns. I.e having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent. What concerns do they have that are valid?
-
Here's the latest:-
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/11/20/europe/germany-coalition-talks-collapse/index.html
-
You said they had valid concerns. I.e having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent. What concerns do they have that are valid?
er, think I've already answered this but if you ask them I'm pretty sure they'll tell you, otherwise their existence would be pointless
-
er, think I've already answered this but if you ask them I'm pretty sure they'll tell you, otherwise their existence would be pointless
No you said their concerms were valid and that they were valud because they were their concerns. This doesn't answer why you think their concerns "are having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent' bit since you don't seem to want to answer that....
-
No you said their concerms were calud and that they were valud becauae they were their concerns. This doesn't answer why you think their concerns "are having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent' bit since you don't seem to want to answer that....
yes , because you are deliberately misunderstanding me and I'm rather tired of it now .
-
yes , because you are deliberately misunderstanding me and I'm rather tired of it now .
So when I ask you what concerns tgey gace tgat you have stated you think ard valid i.e. having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent, I am delibrately misrepresenting you, How does that work then?
-
Walter, I don't blame you, it could go on and on forever with endless little questions, by which time the point of the thread will be lost.
The 'Right' parties in Germany, AfD is one, are anti-euro, anti-immigration, anti-Muslim and no doubt many other things which they believe are pulling Germany down. They will appeal to some voters in the same way as UKIP does here and Trump does in America so they have to be considered. These are huge subjects that need to be debated in detail and I don't believe the concerns raised should be dismissed as invalid just because I don't agree with them.
If arguments are presented clearly and logically with appropriate data, they are valid. Doesn't make them 'right*' but that's opinion.
*correct
-
Walter, I don't blame you, it could go on and on forever by which time the point of the thread will be lost.
The 'Right' parties in Germany, AfD is one, are anti-euro, anti-immigration, anti-Muslim and no doubt many other things which they believe are pulling Germany down. They will appeal to some voters in the same way as UKIP does here and Trump does in America so they have to be considered. These are huge subjects that need to be debated in detail and I don't believe the concerns raised should be dismissed as invalid just because I don't agree with them.
If arguments are presented clearly and logically with appropriate data, they are valid. Doesn't make them 'right' but that's opinion.
I haven't dismissed arguments as invalid becayse I disagree with them. Simply asked Walter which concerns of the far right he thinks are valid i.e. having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent. So far he hasn't answered.
-
Walter, I don't blame you, it could go on and on forever by which time the point of the thread will be lost.
The 'Right' parties in Germany, AfD is one, are anti-euro, anti-immigration, anti-Muslim and no doubt many other things which they believe are pulling Germany down. They will appeal to some voters in the same way as UKIP does here and Trump does in America so they have to be considered. These are huge subjects that need to be debated in detail and I don't believe the concerns raised should be dismissed as invalid just because I don't agree with them.
If arguments are presented clearly and logically with appropriate data, they are valid. Doesn't make them 'right' but that's opinion.
thank you
-
So when I ask you what concerns tgey gace tgat you have stated you think ard valid i.e. having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent, I am delibrately misrepresenting you, How does that work then?
I said 'misunderstanding' . You've changed it to 'misrepresenting'. that's it , I'm out.
-
I said 'misunderstanding' . You've changed it to 'misrepresenting'. that's it , I'm out.
Aren't deliberately misunderstanding/ misrepresenting you equivalent here? How does asking you a question deliberately misunderstanding you then?