Sex: I will get to your post later. I want to thank you for actually wanting to debate things in a civil manner and not making it stock to simply devolve into personal attacks.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Then go back and answer my questions above…or not. You can believe what you want but the facts don’t line up with your belief.
But…hey whatever helps you sleep at night my friend.
These Internet debates never lead to anything of value anyway.
[/quote]
Which question?
The facts do indeed line up with what I’ve written here. If you look into any of the factual statements I’ve made, you will find that they are accurate and based on the best information available to me.
By the way, I think these debates do lead somewhere. We all want to be correct, and in making sure that we are correct, we learn. For ourselves and from each other. A lot sometimes.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
By some very wise people including Lincoln. No nation can last forever and history abounds with examples of the decline of civilisations, cities and nations. When and how will it occur? I don’t know. But the signs of Western civilisation’s progress are easy to perceive: the rennaisance, the enlightenment, revolutionary era, industrial revolution, post-1960’s. When you look at the whole picture of western civilisation it’s very hard to argue that there hasn’t been a cultural decline going on for some time. Are some things better? Sure. But even good things have negative aspects to them.
[/quote]
If you think the decline is so inevitable what is the point in discussing what government policies are best, etc?[/quote]
The fact that Western civilisation has been in decline for a long time doesn’t preclude the need for good governance and public policy. Do I want my life savings wiped out in another economic crisis? No. Do I want to see a continued increase in abortions? No. Do I want marijuana “coffee shops” and associated drug culture on the streets? No.[/quote]
I think 2 of 3 of those are debatable for being responsible for a decline but 1 reason is good enough I suppose.
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
Let’s not let statistics get in the way of a good old fashioned “in my day” rant. Not the way things usually work around here. Evidence is highly overrated to many on here. [/quote]
Yes, because clearly these things just don’t count in your leftist world:
Teen pregnancy, abortion, a larger number of children growing up in one parent households, rising divorce rates, illicit drug usage, more alcoholics, more people killed by alcohol, more child abuse, and murder of children, more school shootings, porn available to 12 year olds with a button click, a continual flow of violent movies, TV and video games, and a fat, sloppy profane arrogant “entitled” populace.
This is the wonderful liberal world that H factor wants us all to enjoy!
[/quote]
I’m shocked that you would completely ignore how DEMONSTRABLY wrong you were on so many points and instead try to shift the discussion to something else. This is literally what you do every time.
You made a bunch of points. Many of these were completely proven wrong and it was shown you were talking out of your ass. You can try and change the subject to save face like you always do and call me a liberal or something, but we’ve already proved you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.
You call me a liberal all day long if you want, but you made a bunch of points in this thread and people have already pointed out how demonstrably wrong you were on everything. So you’re stock answer of shift the discussion comes out. But that won’t make anything you said correct.
[/quote]
LOL bla bla bla…
Speaking of being shocked…I’m shocked that you’re still pretending to be a libertarian.
[quote]H factor wrote:
It’s odd to see people assert stuff that is so easily proven false on the internet. Seriously two minutes of google searching. I didn’t know that stuff off the top of my head. Shows how some people just post with emotion and have no idea if the things they are saying are correct. [/quote]
Then go back and prove my long list of current societal problems wrong. You say they’re wrong yet you’ve never proven them to be wrong. But…this is what you do, over and over and over again.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Then go back and answer my questions above…or not. You can believe what you want but the facts don’t line up with your belief.
But…hey whatever helps you sleep at night my friend.
These Internet debates never lead to anything of value anyway.
[/quote]
Which question?
The facts do indeed line up with what I’ve written here. If you look into any of the factual statements I’ve made, you will find that they are accurate and based on the best information available to me.
By the way, I think these debates do lead somewhere. We all want to be correct, and in making sure that we are correct, we learn. For ourselves and from each other. A lot sometimes.[/quote]
Nope…I’ve been here many years and they rarely lead to anything.
As for the long list of societal problems that we cuurently face I’m still waiting for you or your liberal side kick to answer them.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Then go back and answer my questions above…or not. You can believe what you want but the facts don’t line up with your belief.
But…hey whatever helps you sleep at night my friend.
These Internet debates never lead to anything of value anyway.
[/quote]
Which question?
The facts do indeed line up with what I’ve written here. If you look into any of the factual statements I’ve made, you will find that they are accurate and based on the best information available to me.
By the way, I think these debates do lead somewhere. We all want to be correct, and in making sure that we are correct, we learn. For ourselves and from each other. A lot sometimes.[/quote]
Nope…I’ve been here many years and they rarely lead to anything.
As for the long list of societal problems that we cuurently face I’m still waiting for you or your liberal side kick to answer them. [/quote]
I believe that H Factor showed some of them to be incorrect.
This is an excerpt from one of his posts:
"Let’s see how many of these you get wrong.
Teen pregnancy rates at a 40 year low: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/...ns-study-shows/
Smoking is lower than it has been in a LONG time.
Driving under the influence is down.
Drugs higher than ever? Says who:
Abortion huh? http://www.cbsnews.com/...se-in-a-decade/ "
Those were all points raised by you. And apparently, you were mistaken. I don’t think that you looked them up and happened to read a mendacious source; rather, it’s my suspicion that you simply “felt” that, for example, abortion is on the rise. And so you wrote it. But it would undoubtedly do you good to check your feelings against data before posting.
Anyway, within the context of crime–which is paramount for two reasons: one, because the debate began with crime; and two, because it is a far better and far more direct measure of our nebulous subject than the number of people who smoke cigarettes or have kids before their twentieth birthday–I have the advantage of being supported by the facts. Crime is falling, and has been for decades. Total criminal incidences have not been as low as they are now for nearly half of a century. There were fewer homicides in New York City in 2012 than in any other year since record-keeping became standardized in the early 1960s. The first post of this thread links to an article, published by one of the more respected conservative outlets in the country, which says that mass shootings peaked in 1929 (here is an excerpt, spoken by a criminologist, about mass shootings in recent decades: “there is no pattern, there is no increase”). Add to that the fact that abortion rations have been falling for decades and that the grotesque iniquities of slavery and Jim Crow are long gone, and I’ve got a pretty solid argument.
To return to our original point of contention, then: Abington v. Schempp had absolutely no demonstrable positive effect on American criminality or on the frequency of mass shootings in this country.
As an addendum, I will reiterate that the world we live in is fantastically flawed and some of the tracks we’re on are indeed the wrong ones. There are things about the past that we’ve lost, things that were good and should be striven for again.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Then go back and answer my questions above…or not. You can believe what you want but the facts don’t line up with your belief.
But…hey whatever helps you sleep at night my friend.
These Internet debates never lead to anything of value anyway.
[/quote]
Which question?
The facts do indeed line up with what I’ve written here. If you look into any of the factual statements I’ve made, you will find that they are accurate and based on the best information available to me.
By the way, I think these debates do lead somewhere. We all want to be correct, and in making sure that we are correct, we learn. For ourselves and from each other. A lot sometimes.[/quote]
Nope…I’ve been here many years and they rarely lead to anything.
As for the long list of societal problems that we cuurently face I’m still waiting for you or your liberal side kick to answer them. [/quote]
I believe that H Factor showed some of them to be incorrect.
This is an excerpt from one of his posts:
"Let’s see how many of these you get wrong.
Teen pregnancy rates at a 40 year low: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/...ns-study-shows/
Smoking is lower than it has been in a LONG time.
Driving under the influence is down.
Drugs higher than ever? Says who:
Abortion huh? http://www.cbsnews.com/...se-in-a-decade/ "
Those were all points raised by you. And apparently, you were mistaken. I don’t think that you looked them up and happened to read a mendacious source; rather, it’s my suspicion that you simply “felt” that, for example, abortion is on the rise. And so you wrote it. But it would undoubtedly do you good to check your feelings against data before posting.
Anyway, within the context of crime–which is paramount for two reasons: one, because the debate began with crime; and two, because it is a far better and far more direct measure of our nebulous subject than the number of people who smoke cigarettes or have kids before their twentieth birthday–I have the advantage of being supported by the facts. Crime is falling, and has been for decades. Total criminal incidences have not been as low as they are now for nearly half of a century. There were fewer homicides in New York City in 2012 than in any other year since record-keeping became standardized in the early 1960s. The first post of this thread links to an article, published by one of the more respected conservative outlets in the country, which says that mass shootings peaked in 1929 (here is an excerpt, spoken by a criminologist, about mass shootings in recent decades: “there is no pattern, there is no increase”). Add to that the fact that abortion rations have been falling for decades and that the grotesque iniquities of slavery and Jim Crow are long gone, and I’ve got a pretty solid argument.
To return to our original point of contention, then: Abington v. Schempp had absolutely no demonstrable positive effect on American criminality or on the frequency of mass shootings in this country.
As an addendum, I will reiterate that the world we live in is fantastically flawed and some of the tracks we’re on are indeed the wrong ones. There are things about the past that we’ve lost, things that were good and should be striven for again.[/quote]
Oh darn you and your liberal cohort are wrong:
Abortion rates are up!
Drug use among children is up!
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/druguse.htm
Durg use in the US is higher than any other developed country!
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500368_162-4222322.html
There’s more violence in TV and movies than even a decade ago!
There’s more pornography available to children!
http://www.protectkids.com/effects/harms.htm
Child abuse is now “epidemic” Check out the RISE of child abuse over the years!
http://www.childhelp.org/pages/statistics/
Perhaps in liberal la la land our moral standards have not hit cesspool depth. But in the real world that I live in every day we are sinking (morally) faster than the titanic after it hit the iceberg.
Please…as I said before this Internet debate gets us no where. You just believe whatever you want it doesn’t matter if it’s true.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Oh darn you and your liberal cohort are wrong:
Abortion rates are up!
[/quote]
Just going after your first point about abortion, which by the way was a link about a slight one-year uptick from over 2 years ago:
The US abortion rate peaked in 1980 and the trend has been downward since. The rate dropped 5% between 2008 and 2009. 2009 represents an all-time low. AN ALL-TIME LOW.
So, again, abortion is on the decline and has been generally declining for decades. There is no other way to interpret the data, so you should stop using it as evidence.
I notice that you make no mention of crime, despite the fact that this conversation began with crime and crime is inarguably a better measure in this debate than pornography and violence on fucking TV and child abuse, which was not regularly reported until very recently (again, do you not think parents slapped kids around in the 40s? Wake up).
I will re-post this in the hope that you will address it:
Within the context of crime–which is paramount for two reasons: one, because the debate began with crime; and two, because it is a far better and far more direct measure of our nebulous subject than the number of people who smoke cigarettes or have kids before their twentieth birthday–I have the advantage of being supported by the facts. Crime is falling, and has been for decades. Total criminal incidences have not been as low as they are now for nearly half of a century. There were fewer homicides in New York City in 2012 than in any other year since record-keeping became standardized in the early 1960s. The first post of this thread links to an article, published by one of the more respected conservative outlets in the country, which says that mass shootings peaked in 1929 (here is an excerpt, spoken by a criminologist, about mass shootings in recent decades: “there is no pattern, there is no increase”). Add to that the fact that abortion rations have been falling for decades and that the grotesque iniquities of slavery and Jim Crow are long gone, and I’ve got a pretty solid argument.
To return to our original point of contention, then: Abington v. Schempp had absolutely no demonstrable positive effect on American criminality or on the frequency of mass shootings in this country.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Oh darn you and your liberal cohort are wrong:
Abortion rates are up!
[/quote]
Just going after your first point about abortion, which by the way was a link about a slight one-year uptick from over 2 years ago:
The US abortion rate peaked in 1980 and the trend has been downward since. The rate dropped 5% between 2008 and 2009. 2009 represents an all-time low. AN ALL-TIME LOW.
So, again, abortion is on the decline and has been generally declining for decades. There is no other way to interpret the data, so you should stop using it as evidence.
I notice that you make no mention of crime, despite the fact that this conversation began with crime and crime is inarguably a better measure in this debate than pornography and violence on fucking TV and child abuse, which was not regularly reported until very recently (again, do you not think parents slapped kids around in the 40s? Wake up).
I will re-post this in the hope that you will address it:
Within the context of crime–which is paramount for two reasons: one, because the debate began with crime; and two, because it is a far better and far more direct measure of our nebulous subject than the number of people who smoke cigarettes or have kids before their twentieth birthday–I have the advantage of being supported by the facts. Crime is falling, and has been for decades. Total criminal incidences have not been as low as they are now for nearly half of a century. There were fewer homicides in New York City in 2012 than in any other year since record-keeping became standardized in the early 1960s. The first post of this thread links to an article, published by one of the more respected conservative outlets in the country, which says that mass shootings peaked in 1929 (here is an excerpt, spoken by a criminologist, about mass shootings in recent decades: “there is no pattern, there is no increase”). Add to that the fact that abortion rations have been falling for decades and that the grotesque iniquities of slavery and Jim Crow are long gone, and I’ve got a pretty solid argument.
To return to our original point of contention, then: Abington v. Schempp had absolutely no demonstrable positive effect on American criminality or on the frequency of mass shootings in this country.[/quote]
Funny you dropped all the other points and in your words “went after” this one. Well, at least I’m glad you’ve come over to reality.
By the way, how many abortions were there in the US in in 1972? Or for that matter in 1982 even after it was legal? Conisderably less than there were in 2011. Google it my friend!
Really, you are way, way out on a limb attempting to defend morality in 2012. And quite frankly I’m surprised you have not just walked away from the thread by now. No one…as good as you are…can claim, with a straight face at least, that we are a more moral people than we were several years back.
And…up to this point I have not even mentioned the obesity epidemic. Should we put the topic of gluttony on the table too?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Oh darn you and your liberal cohort are wrong:
Abortion rates are up!
[/quote]
Just going after your first point about abortion, which by the way was a link about a slight one-year uptick from over 2 years ago:
The US abortion rate peaked in 1980 and the trend has been downward since. The rate dropped 5% between 2008 and 2009. 2009 represents an all-time low. AN ALL-TIME LOW.
So, again, abortion is on the decline and has been generally declining for decades. There is no other way to interpret the data, so you should stop using it as evidence.
I notice that you make no mention of crime, despite the fact that this conversation began with crime and crime is inarguably a better measure in this debate than pornography and violence on fucking TV and child abuse, which was not regularly reported until very recently (again, do you not think parents slapped kids around in the 40s? Wake up).
I will re-post this in the hope that you will address it:
Within the context of crime–which is paramount for two reasons: one, because the debate began with crime; and two, because it is a far better and far more direct measure of our nebulous subject than the number of people who smoke cigarettes or have kids before their twentieth birthday–I have the advantage of being supported by the facts. Crime is falling, and has been for decades. Total criminal incidences have not been as low as they are now for nearly half of a century. There were fewer homicides in New York City in 2012 than in any other year since record-keeping became standardized in the early 1960s. The first post of this thread links to an article, published by one of the more respected conservative outlets in the country, which says that mass shootings peaked in 1929 (here is an excerpt, spoken by a criminologist, about mass shootings in recent decades: “there is no pattern, there is no increase”). Add to that the fact that abortion rations have been falling for decades and that the grotesque iniquities of slavery and Jim Crow are long gone, and I’ve got a pretty solid argument.
To return to our original point of contention, then: Abington v. Schempp had absolutely no demonstrable positive effect on American criminality or on the frequency of mass shootings in this country.[/quote]
Funny you dropped all the other points and in your words “went after” this one. Well, at least I’m glad you’ve come over to reality.
By the way, how many abortions were there in the US in in 1972? Or for that matter in 1982 even after it was legal? Conisderably less than there were in 2011. Google it my friend!
Really, you are way, way out on a limb attempting to defend morality in 2012. And quite frankly I’m surprised you have not just walked away from the thread by now. No one…as good as you are…can claim, with a straight face at least, that we are a more moral people than we were several years back.
And…up to this point I have not even mentioned the obesity epidemic. Should we put the topic of gluttony on the table too?
[/quote]
I’ll address the others later, headed to a NYE party now. I don’t know what you mean by “there were fewer abortions in 1972 than in 2011,” but proportional ratios are what we use as a measurement–abortions per a certain number of women or a certain number of pregnancies --and that measurement has been on the decline for decades. It does not help your argument to ignore this fact.
I notice that you still have not addressed the fact that crime, which once again was the catalyst for this discussion and is by far a better measure than something like teen pregnancy, is at its lowest point in half a century. Relatedly, the removal of prayer from public school–which you connected to the Newtown massacre–had absolutely not positive effect on criminality or mass shootings, per crime statistics and the article referenced in the first post of this thread.
By the way, ideological differences be damned, happy New Year to you and all!
[quote]smh23 wrote:
I’ll address the others later, headed to a NYE party now. I don’t know what you mean by “there were fewer abortions in 1972 than in 2011,” but proportional ratios are what we use as a measurement–abortions per a certain number of women or a certain number of pregnancies --and that measurement has been on the decline for decades. It does not help your argument to ignore this fact.
[/quote]
Oh stop it. I used 1972 because abortion was not legal until 1973. So…there were less abortions PERIOD. And if you go back to 1952 there were even less. You really have to stop this nonsense it’s beneath you.
[quote]I notice that you still have not addressed the fact that crime, which once again was the catalyst for this discussion and is by far a better measure than something like teen pregnancy, is at its lowest point in half a century. Relatedly, the removal of prayer from public school–which you connected to the Newtown massacre–had absolutely not positive effect on criminality or mass shootings, per crime statistics and the article referenced in the first post of this thread.
[/quote]
I did address it. I said yes crime rates in many instances are lower. And that has to do with demographics more than anything.
I noticed you didn’t address any of the many points that I posted in addition to the latest one…obesity. But that’s okay you are not a miracle worked and there’s only so much smoke you can use for your screen 
Now let’s stop this foolishness. I assure you of one thing 10 years from now things will be much worse than they are currently. I’ve been watching this occur every decade without fail as we drift further from our Christian moral base. Again, whether you believe in God or not it is a solid moral base that we drifted from.
Happy New Year to you too.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
I’ll address the others later, headed to a NYE party now. I don’t know what you mean by “there were fewer abortions in 1972 than in 2011,” but proportional ratios are what we use as a measurement–abortions per a certain number of women or a certain number of pregnancies --and that measurement has been on the decline for decades. It does not help your argument to ignore this fact.
[/quote]
Oh stop it. I used 1972 because abortion was not legal until 1973. So…there were less abortions PERIOD. And if you go back to 1952 there were even less. You really have to stop this nonsense it’s beneath you.
[/quote]
Tell me–does the trend represented in this graphic suggest that immorality is on the rise or on the decline since abortion was made legal?
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
I’ll address the others later, headed to a NYE party now. I don’t know what you mean by “there were fewer abortions in 1972 than in 2011,” but proportional ratios are what we use as a measurement–abortions per a certain number of women or a certain number of pregnancies --and that measurement has been on the decline for decades. It does not help your argument to ignore this fact.
[/quote]
Oh stop it. I used 1972 because abortion was not legal until 1973. So…there were less abortions PERIOD. And if you go back to 1952 there were even less. You really have to stop this nonsense it’s beneath you.
[/quote]
Tell me–does the trend represented in this graphic suggest that immorality is on the rise or on the decline since abortion was made legal?[/quote]
Are there numbers on women getting pregnant in the first place? If the pregnancy rate goes down then so does the abortion rate, assuming views on abortion remain constant.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Are there numbers on women getting pregnant in the first place? If the pregnancy rate goes down then so does the abortion rate, assuming views on abortion remain constant.[/quote]
Astute point, but this is built into the data already. The pink line represents an abortion ratio–defined in this case as abortions per 1000 live births. A drop in the abortion rate (per a certain number of women, rather than births), if it were wholly the product of a drop in the pregnancy rate, would have no effect on the ratio.
As you can see, the ratio has been on a downward trend for thirty years. It ticked up in 2009 but has just this year reached an all-time low.
Again, there is only one conclusion that can be drawn from this data, and I don’t really understand why Zeb is refusing to admit that the picture of abortion in America, while far from good, has been improving for decades. This is not a matter of opinion but one of being able to determine whether a line is sloping upward or downward.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Again, there is only one conclusion that can be drawn from this data, and I don’t really understand why Zeb is refusing to admit that the picture of abortion in America, while far from good, has been improving for decades. This is not a matter of opinion but one of being able to determine whether a line is sloping upward or downward.[/quote]
And I understand why you won’t address the many points that I’ve mentioned, But, you don’t get to avoid them if you want to stay on this thread. As for abortion it is higher than it was 30+ years ago and that is my point. And certainly much much higher than they were 50 years ago. So generally things are not as good in that area are they?
Now as for the other moral filth…you can begin defending it right now.
Convince me that none of it exists in liberal la la land:
Abortion rates are up!
http://www.politicsdaily.com/...downward-trend/
Drug use among children is up!
http://www.cdc.gov/...ats/druguse.htm
Durg use in the US is higher than any other developed country!
http://www.cbsnews.com/...62-4222322.html
There’s more violence in TV and movies than even a decade ago!
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/…$NMW_TRANS$=ext
There’s more pornography available to children!
http://www.protectkids.com/...fects/harms.htm
Child abuse is now “epidemic” Check out the RISE of child abuse over the years!