Jump to content

Fairness Doctrine 2009


sevfiv

Recommended Posts

Thank you for the laugh Htown. Do tell about this hectic, fastpaced, jetsetting lifestyle you so enjoy. How many miles did you jog today? How many homeless were you out saving today? Right, so busy with your 3 trips to Starbucks today to get your Mocha Lattes, and fastpaced flipping of channels between Oprah, HGTV and WE. Give us a break, oh "Active" one. I wish I could sit at home and listen to radio. :lol:

Miles jogged.... 4

Homeless saved... none today as of yet

Starbucks... don't drink coffee

TV... HGTV... don't watch... WE... don't watch... Oprah... that's a person, not a television channel

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miles jogged.... 4

Homeless saved... none today as of yet

Starbucks... don't drink coffee

TV... HGTV... don't watch... WE... don't watch... Oprah... that's a person, not a television channel

;)

Don't watch HGTV? You sure you are Gay? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? I've heard more than two positions on gay marriage, many of them on this forum. Here are a few:

1. For gay marriage, want to replace domestic partnerships and civil unions.

2. Against gay marriage, domestic partnerships & civil unions.

3. For domestic partnerships or civil unions but against gay marriage.

4. Against the federal government defining marriage, want to leave it to the states.

5. Against any government involvement in the definition of marriage, want it to be a religious issue like "baptized" or "excommunicated".

Very few "issues" have only two sides. There may be many reasons to vote yes or no on a bill; is it fair to only give voice to one reason for each vote? Who determines which reason will be broadcast? The federal government? Elected officials? Appointed bureaucrats?

Even on this issue (The Fairness Doctrine) we can find more than two sides.

You can vote yes or no, to each one of those issues. Many different people, from many different political persuasions, can give any number of pros and cons and defend subsequent positions - for or against - any given issue. If you don't care about an issue, you could care less if you were in the affirmative or negative. And you cannot be BOTH for and against an isssue and have any credibility. Take your number #4. How you can both agree and disagree with that statement, simultaneously? You may be against #4, but for #1, having different rationale for each item...

I'd love to hear a more fair and balanced, mature discussion about the issues of the day vs. what is out there now.

Oh yea... trust me, I'm gay. he he I've never been into the whole "home improvement, decorating" stuff. I am more of a "Food Network" gay... love to cook!

We need more proof. I'm just not quite sure...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can vote yes or no, to each one of those issues. Many different people, from many different political persuasions, can give any number of pros and cons and defend subsequent positions - for or against - any given issue. If you don't care about an issue, you could care less if you were in the affirmative or negative. And you cannot be BOTH for and against an isssue and have any credibility. Take your number #4. How you can both agree and disagree with that statement, simultaneously? You may be against #4, but for #1, having different rationale for each item...

But those weren't the issues; the issue was "gay marriage". Those are 5 possible positions on the issue. Likewise, if we zoom in on position #4, there are multiple positions one could take, each reflecting a different motivation, with different boundary conditions. There aren't enough hours in the day or channels on the air to give equal time to every possible position on every issue. "Fairness" is an illusion. Someone will always be left out.

I'd love to hear a more fair and balanced, mature discussion about the issues of the day vs. what is out there now.

You have a computer right in front of you. You can find discussions as mature or immature as you like about just about any issue. Getting the government to decide which sitcoms lean too far "left" (along with what "left" means this week) doesn't seem like a viable solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...