[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
Re: reply to Matt Kuss/racism and debate
On Wed, 12 Feb, Bob Lechtreck wrote:
> At 12:55 PM 2/12/97 MST7MDT, Terry West wrote:
> > This is irrelevant. My question was not based on whether or not racism and
> > sexism are bad, but on whether or not it was acceptable for a judge to allow
> > life experiences to influence their ballot.
> You're confused again, Bob. Race and gender are not just "life
> experiences." The are fundamental biological attributes.
> Am I speaking a foreign language? Which part of "...whether or not it was
> acceptable for a judge to allow life experiences to influence their ballot"
> was confusing. You seem to be focused on something that I have not
Bob, I don't know what language you're speaking, but you're having a
difficult time understanding. As I point out--race and gender are
not "life experiences."
> Maybe I'm missing something here. Maybe you are assuming that it IS okay to
> allow the intervention, just that race and gender are the ONLY life
> experiences that can be used to intervene. If this is your point, please say so.
Again, race and gender are not "life experiences"--I think you are
the one trivializing here. One's race and gender may INFLUENCE life
experiences, but they are more than that--they are of the essence of
> Political and religious opinions are different. We have a right to hold
> them; that doesn't mean they're all equal. Some opinions are downright stupid.
> To paraphrase you, who appointed YOU the decider of which opinions are stupid?
> Additionally, you never said anything about my question re: the holocaust.
> Does that mean that you agree that religious opinion may be kinda important
> to some people? Or that "they can stand a little challenge once in a while"
> seems to trivialize some VERY real life experiences?
Well, there you go again, Bob--refuting your own argument. Among the
opinions that are downright stupid are those that hold that the
holocaust did not happen. It is one of the most carefully documented
facts in world history. Now I'm not sure what was your particular
question on the holocaust. If it's whether a judge should intervene
to ignore an argument that says the holocaust didn't happen, I have
no problem with that.
> Bob, look up "rights" and "beliefs" in the dictionary. Then you'll
> see the "points."
> While I was at it I looked up hammer and screwdriver. Imagine that, BOTH
> sets were different.
> Now, I have a "right" to my "beliefs", just like I have a "right" to be free
> from racism, or a "right" to equality. The fact that my "rights" are just as
> important to me as yours are to you is the point here.
A right to hold a belief does not make a "right" and a "belief" the
same thing. We can appropriately judge your beliefs according to any
of several standards for argumentation. We cannot judge that you
have no right to equality just because you are black, white, male, or
> More importantly, the question has ALWAYS remained whether or not it is
> acceptable for judges to use life experiences as a basis for their decision.
> And who appointed you the damn scorekeeper anyway?
> I did. Anytime the game involves me, I make damn sure that I DO keep score.
> You want to keep score too, go right ahead... I'm not threatened by that.
Fair enough; me too.
> This will be my last rendition of, "great, but that's NOT the question at
> hand". If the discussion comes back to life experiences affecting the
> ballot, I'll rejoin.
> Bob Lechtreck
> Bakersfield College
> PUTTING OUT FIRES, AND DAMN GOOD DEBATERS
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (email@example.com)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page