Debating............

[Guest SerenityNow]

We have a debate forum, far as I am concerned it is a place to discuss opposing views. If one does not wish to debate then he/she shouldn't post in that section. Here is what "Debate" means in the dictionary....

 

de·bate ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-bt)

v. de·bat·ed, de·bat·ing, de·bates

v. intr.

To consider something; deliberate.

To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.

To engage in a formal discussion or argument. See Synonyms at discuss.

Obsolete. To fight or quarrel.

 

v. tr.

To deliberate on; consider.

To dispute or argue about.

To discuss or argue (a question, for example) formally.

Obsolete. To fight or argue for or over.

 

n.

A discussion involving opposing points; an argument.

Deliberation; consideration: passed the motion with little debate.

A formal contest of argumentation in which two opposing teams defend and attack a given proposition.

Obsolete. Conflict; strife.

 

 

No matter what, it means discussing opposing views. Opposing views ARE NOT ALWAYS going to be all nicey nicey with sweet language. We can't hold some people accountable and not others no matter how nice of a Christian they are and also, no matter if they are friend or not. This is an EXC site and if one chooses not to debate then don't. However, when someone ENTERS willfully into the debate forums it is only fair that others share their views as to WHY they uphold a certain position using scriptural proofs, supporting documents, etc. Debates can be very passionate and it's only natural for people to get upset, REGARDLESS of the KIND of PERSON being debated is of the opposing view. Look at Marley Matlin and her democratic husband. When they debate each other, it gets heated, but at the end of the day they still love each other.

 

Some people come here and throw names around and are treated accordingly but their is a HUGE difference in name calling DURING debate than asking someone to be accountable for their view, no matter how "harsh" it may be.

[thomas]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There are different kinds of debate with different purposes. At this site, I think the most important element in the debates is to have an open agenda. We do not come here to sell a certain fixed message, but with a desire to find the truth, no matter how unpleasant and hurtful that truth may be.

[trashy]

so does TAP start threads in the Debate forum? or jump in and vigorously debate ExC peeps?

[Vigile]

I love you Thankful.

 

I really don't get this cultural aversion to disagreeing over politics and religion. Everyone [everyone in its most general sense] it seems would prefer to just whitewash and ignore rather than challenge and discuss. I can't do it. When I lived in Italy for a year and a half I found the opposite to be true. I debated heatedly with my Italian friends and you know what? We ended up so much closer for the effort. They respect you if you have an opinion and share it even if it disagrees with their own.

 

I lived with 4 Italians in a big, but not so big apartment in Turin Italy. One was a northern separatist, two were communists, and one was a black shirt fascist. We all debated loudly and passionatly. At the same time, we all loved each other. We respected one another. We sat down and ate dinner peacefully with one another. I felt so at home. If I had guarded my opinions the way my own father and mother do, they would have regarded me as stupid and uninteresting. The purpose of the debates was not necessarily to change the other's mind, but to be real. It was the greatest year and a half of my life. My Italian roommates whom I oft disagreed with are to this day some of the greatest friends I've ever had.

[Vigile]

so does TAP start threads in the Debate forum?  or jump in and vigorously debate ExC peeps?

 

She's started several threads and she has promised to provide us answers to questions in the past. We called her out on that. She provided her response and I for one am letting it go now. I stated my case and said my piece. I can't see how I can take it further and not have it end up badly at this point.

[Vigile]

Here's a couple of examples of that I have been interested in hearing her conclusions on:

 

“I honestly think you really don't believe in hell.”

 

Yes, I do.

 

And here comes the fear factor. I have a loving relationship with my Creator but won’t, for one second hide the fact that I fear eternal torment and separation from him.

 

Please know, after the discussions I have had here it would be much easier for me to be a Buddhist or follow Wicca.

 

I don’t want to comment further on why I believe hell to be the truth until I read through the links that Zoe left for me.

 

Tap

[trashy]

Here's a couple of examples of that I have been interested in hearing her conclusions on:

 

“I honestly think you really don't believe in hell.”

 

Yes, I do.

 

And here comes the fear factor. I have a loving relationship with my Creator but won’t, for one second hide the fact that I fear eternal torment and separation from him.

 

Please know, after the discussions I have had here it would be much easier for me to be a Buddhist or follow Wicca.

 

I don’t want to comment further on why I believe hell to be the truth until I read through the links that Zoe left for me.

 

Tap

sounds like she is being rather transparent and admitting some doubts and fears - why is this cause for alarm?

[Vigile]

sounds like she is being rather transparent and admitting some doubts and fears - why is this cause for alarm?

 

No, not alarm. I would be very interested to discuss with her the opinions she had of the material provided by Zoe. She provided us this response a long time ago. She has promised several times to provide us with follow up answers. They have not been forthcoming. As I said, there is no where else to take this. I'm not going to badger her. I would have liked to get a real conversation going with her but since she is not comfortable with it I won't pursue it further. I don't want to disrupt the whole forum and cause everyone to take sides.

[Totallyatpeace]

No, not alarm.  I would be very interested to discuss with her the opinions she had of the material provided by Zoe.  She provided us this response a long time ago.  She has promised several times to provide us with follow up answers.  They have not been forthcoming.  As I said, there is no where else to take this.  I'm not going to badger her.  I would have liked to get a real conversation going with her but since she is not comfortable with it I won't pursue it further.  I don't want to disrupt the whole forum and cause everyone to take sides.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And here was my answer.

 

"I did the Hebrew and Greek study and looked up every reference to hell. I found that in the OT hell is always referred to as death, the pit or the grave. It is never referred to as eternal torment. In the NT, I found the eternal torment in revelation and also one other place.....don't know off the top of my head. I believe it was Christ's words and if you want to know I'll look it up. (but you already know)

 

My beliefs on hell have only changed in the sense that I have more knowledge about it now and have started enquiring of my own Pastor and family (Father) as to why this is."

 

I disagree with the links she provided because the Bible says otherwise and since I still believe that the Bible is the Word of God from cover to cover.......my view has only changed in the sense that I stated above. This is something that I am still working through.

 

Tap

[Vigile]

And here was my answer.

 

 

Tap

 

Thanks

[Checkmate]

Not that I want this to be viewed as "taking sides", (and if it is, so what?), but I have to agree with Thankful's post.

 

As has been harped at ME, by Xians who come here, the DEBATE forum is for DEBATING ideas. If you don't care for the free exhange of ideas, AND defending them, then don't enter the "lion's den". You have no right to tell people of your lofty ideas, and then back out of defending them. Whether or not you began the topic or not, is irrelevant.

 

If, like TAP, you can NOT defend your beliefs, then just say so. "My beliefs are indefensible, but I'm gonna hold to them anyway."

 

I consider that foolish, but at least I can respect the honesty.

 

It's not "unfair" or "unreasonable" for members in the Debate forum to expect answers. THAT is what everyone has come for.

 

 

 

P.S. - And could you "White Knights in shining armor" please dismount your horses and allow these "damsels in distress" to defend themselves? Sheesh! You'd think in this age of Women's Liberation that women couldn't hold their own in a debate. Stop rushing to TAP's and Amanda's defense, willya? If this were about Inviticus, SavedbyFaith or Guacamole, we wouldn't be HAVING this conversation, and you know it.

[I Broke Free]

I lived with 4 Italians in a big, but not so big apartment in Turin Italy.  One was a northern separatist, two were communists, and one was a black shirt fascist.  We all debated loudly and passionatly.  At the same time, we all loved each other.  We respected one another.  We sat down and ate dinner peacefully with one another.  I felt so at home.  If I had guarded my opinions the way my own father and mother do, they would have regarded me as stupid and uninteresting.  The purpose of the debates was not necessarily to change the other's mind, but to be real.  It was the greatest year and a half of my life.  My Italian roommates whom I oft disagreed with are to this day some of the greatest friends I've ever had.

 

Thanks for sharing this Vigile. I have had similar debating experiences in my life. A good lively debate, even with people who have opposing views can help us understand people better and actually bring them closer. I respect the opposing views of many of friends because they are well read, present good arguments and they are passionate about them. However I have never been able to duplicate this experience online. Being physically in the space as the person or people you are debating is extremely helpful. You can read their faces and body language and immediately know that you have more explaining to do. The chances of offending people are also reduced because your eyes and the inflections in your voice will tell them what you were really implying.

 

Have you ever noticed that when you are walking on a very crowded sidewalk and you bump into someone, the results are usually eye contact indicating that you are sorry followed by a short pleasantry and then you move on; but when something similar happens behind the wheel of your car and you cannot see the other driver’s face, you immediately become enraged. This is what happens to me in the debate forum. It is also why I avoid it.

 

IBF

[trashy]

P.S. - And could you "White Knights in shining armor" please dismount your horses and allow these "damsels in distress" to defend themselves?  Sheesh!  You'd think in this age of Women's Liberation that women couldn't hold their own in a debate.  Stop rushing to TAP's and Amanda's defense, willya?  If this were about Inviticus, SavedbyFaith or Guacamole, we wouldn't be HAVING this conversation, and you know it.

So far I've asked three questions - I would hope you would not call that a defense of any one! People just seem to be getting worked up about TAP, I am merely attempting to understand.

[Vigile]

Thanks for sharing this Vigile. I have had similar debating experiences in my life. A good lively debate, even with people who have opposing views can help us understand people better and actually bring them closer. I respect the opposing views of many of friends because they are well read, present good arguments and they are passionate about them.  However I have never been able to duplicate this experience online. Being physically in the space as the person or people you are debating is extremely helpful. You can read their faces and body language and immediately know that you have more explaining to do. The chances of offending people are also reduced because your eyes and the inflections in your voice will tell them what you were really implying.

 

Have you ever noticed that when you are walking on a very crowded sidewalk and you bump into someone, the results are usually eye contact indicating that you are sorry followed by a short pleasantry and then you move on; but when something similar happens behind the wheel of your car and you cannot see the other driver’s face, you immediately become enraged. This is what happens to me in the debate forum. It is also why I avoid it.

 

IBF

 

My wife tells me that 10% of language is verbal and the rest is body language. I don't have the documentation to back that up, but it makes a good point if it's true.

 

I get what you're saying and the analogy between driving and walking is pertinent. When writing I try and follow the rules I learned at the university, spelling out in detail my thought process. You can never assume that the reader understands what you are thinking; you have to tell them in specifics. I'm not sure I am always successful.

[Vigile]

So far I've asked three questions - I would hope you would not call that a defense of any one!  People just seem to be getting worked up about TAP, I am merely attempting to understand.

 

You bastard! You had me so worked up tonight that i could just... ...well, I could just spit!

 

[just kidding Trashy]

[trashy]

You bastard!  You had me so worked up tonight that i could just... ...well, I could just spit! 

 

[just kidding Trashy]

LOL

[Lanakila]

so does TAP start threads in the Debate forum?  or jump in and vigorously debate ExC peeps?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Let's this not be about a particular person, please.

[trashy]

Let's this not be about a particular person, please.

I would certainly expect the gloves to come off and rigorous debate to ensue inside the debate forum. Enter at your own risk.

[quicksand]

I lived with 4 Italians in a big, but not so big apartment in Turin Italy.  One was a northern separatist, two were communists, and one was a black shirt fascist.  We all debated loudly and passionatly.  At the same time, we all loved each other.  We respected one another.  We sat down and ate dinner peacefully with one another.

 

Reminds me of a conversation I had while I was in Granada, Spain. It was late at night and I was sitting in-between between a Catalonian and an Andalucian at the bar that was downstairs from our 15 dollar a night 3 star hotel. Talk about the differences they were hashing over. Everything from race (even though they looked pretty white to me) and to the differences in language. Which is all true, yet while they debated they continued to buy each other drinks and extend the courtesy to me while I held on for dear life in the conversation. My Spanish ain't that good.

[Amethyst]

I really don't get this cultural aversion to disagreeing over politics and religion.

 

It's because most people can't disagree politely for very long, without hurting another person's feelings, or losing their temper. Someone will inevitably end up feeling harassed and discriminated against, even if he/she isn't technically being harassed or discriminated against. Not to mention, in America, there are way too many lawsuits. So to avoid being sued, most workplaces discourage religious or political discussion.

[Reach]

P.S. - And could you "White Knights in shining armor" please dismount your horses and allow these "damsels in distress" to defend themselves?  Sheesh!  You'd think in this age of Women's Liberation that women couldn't hold their own in a debate.  Stop rushing to TAP's and Amanda's defense, willya?  If this were about Inviticus, SavedbyFaith or Guacamole, we wouldn't be HAVING this conversation, and you know it.

Another male who is able to see our hypocrisy!

 

When a woman is perceived to be in perpetual need of defense by the white knights in shining armor, while it might be considered a noble venture to defend and protect her it is more honorable to allow her the chance to learn some self-defense for her own good. To deny her that lesson is an insult to her intelligence and to continually spring to defend her is to deny her the opportunity to learn to defend herself.

[Checkmate]

Another male who is able to see our hypocrisy! 

 

When a woman is perceived to be in perpetual need of defense by the white knights in shining armor, while it might be considered a noble venture to defend and protect her it is more honorable to allow her the chance to learn some self-defense for her own good. To deny her that lesson is an insult to her intelligence and to continually spring to defend her is to deny her the opportunity to learn to defend herself.

 

Aw, shunkins, ma'am! Tweren't nuthin. As a male having grown up in a family predominately female (ratio 6 to 1), it's impossible for me to view women as "weak". The strongest people I know are female. (Present company included!)

 

When a scrap breaks out, I KNOW my place: BEHIND my woman!

[crazy-tiger]

When a scrap breaks out, I KNOW my place: BEHIND my woman! 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's my favourite place, that is...

[a midnight star]

WOW!!

 

I am a woman and I do not ever want anyone coming in and saving me. If and when I feel offended I do try to back off for a little while. While I am not a christian, I have had my share of debating that which is in opposition of most of the boardies here. That is fine. I think that if I am going to enter into a debate knowing that my view isn't going to go over well, I had better show intelligent reasons why I believe the way that I do.

 

I do know that my comments have been regarded as "salty" etc.... , but to be honest, I only debate one way. As clear, consise, and direct as I can be. I do this in hopes that my ideas and the reasons behind them are at least presented.

 

 

OK my two cents:

 

If I can handle the heat as a woman, then any woman should be able to, or stay out of the way.

[Amethyst]

Agreed, Midnight Star.