Shut up. You're not "entitled" to your opinion.

5 October 2012, 6.28am AEST

No, you’re not entitled to your opinion

Every year, I try to do at least two things with my students at least once. First, I make a point of addressing them as “philosophers” – a bit cheesy, but hopefully it encourages active learning.

Secondly, I say something like this: “I’m sure you’ve heard the expression ‘everyone is entitled to their opinion.’ Perhaps you’ve even said it yourself, maybe to head off an argument or bring one to a close. Well, as soon as you walk into this room, it’s no longer true. You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to what you can argue for.” [SlightlyPerfect's emphasis! ]

A bit harsh? Perhaps, but philosophy teachers owe it to our students to teach them how to construct and defend an argument – and to recognize when a belief has become indefensible.

The problem with “I’m entitled to my opinion” is that, all too often, it’s used to shelter beliefs that should have been abandoned. It becomes shorthand for “I can say or think whatever I like” – and by extension, continuing to argue is somehow disrespectful. And this attitude feeds, I suggest, into the false equivalence between experts and non-experts that is an increasingly pernicious feature of our public discourse.

Firstly, what’s an opinion?

Plato distinguished between opinion or common belief (doxa) and certain knowledge, and that’s still a workable distinction today: unlike “1+1=2” or “there are no square circles,” an opinion has a degree of subjectivity and uncertainty to it. But “opinion” ranges from tastes or preferences, through views about questions that concern most people such as prudence or politics, to views grounded in technical expertise, such as legal or scientific opinions.

You can’t really argue about the first kind of opinion. I’d be silly to insist that you’re wrong to think strawberry ice cream is better than chocolate. The problem is that sometimes we implicitly seem to take opinions of the second and even the third sort to be unarguable in the way questions of taste are. Perhaps that’s one reason (no doubt there are others) why enthusiastic amateurs think they’re entitled to disagree with climate scientists and immunologists and have their views “respected.”

Meryl Dorey is the leader of the Australian Vaccination Network, which despite the name is vehemently anti-vaccine. Ms. Dorey has no medical qualifications, but argues that if Bob Brown is allowed to comment on nuclear power despite not being a scientist, she should be allowed to comment on vaccines. But no-one assumes Dr. Brown is an authority on the physics of nuclear fission; his job is to comment on the policy responses to the science, not the science itself.

So what does it mean to be “entitled” to an opinion?

If “Everyone’s entitled to their opinion” just means no-one has the right to stop people thinking and saying whatever they want, then the statement is true, but fairly trivial. No one can stop you saying that vaccines cause autism, no matter how many times that claim has been disproven.

But if ‘entitled to an opinion’ means ‘entitled to have your views treated as serious candidates for the truth’ then it’s pretty clearly false. And this too is a distinction that tends to get blurred.

On Monday, the ABC’s Mediawatch program took WIN-TV Wollongong to task for running a story on a measles outbreak which included comment from – you guessed it – Meryl Dorey. In a response to a viewer complaint, WIN said that the story was “accurate, fair and balanced and presented the views of the medical practitioners and of the choice groups.” But this implies an equal right to be heard on a matter in which only one of the two parties has the relevant expertise. Again, if this was about policy responses to science, this would be reasonable. But the so-called “debate” here is about the science itself, and the “choice groups” simply don’t have a claim on air time if that’s where the disagreement is supposed to lie.

Mediawatch host Jonathan Holmes was considerably more blunt: “there’s evidence, and there’s bulldust,” and it’s no part of a reporter’s job to give bulldust equal time with serious expertise.

The response from anti-vaccination voices was predictable. On the Mediawatch site, Ms. Dorey accused the ABC of “openly calling for censorship of a scientific debate.” This response confuses not having your views taken seriously with not being allowed to hold or express those views at all – or to borrow a phrase from Andrew Brown, it “confuses losing an argument with losing the right to argue.” Again, two senses of “entitlement” to an opinion are being conflated here.

So next time you hear someone declare they’re entitled to their opinion, ask them why they think that. Chances are, if nothing else, you’ll end up having a more enjoyable conversation that way.

Read more from Patrick Stokes: The ethics of bravery

[Naturewoman4]

I'm sorry TCgirlatheart, I have no idea what you are talking about.  It could be that I didn't sleep well (because of my older dog), & went to bed around 3:30am.  What questions did you have for me again, over this thread? 

I thought YOU did bring up the TM/GZ case & my posts.  Perhaps, I'm more tired than I thought.  Actually, I haven't wanted to talk about that case for a long time now, yet people just pop into posts that has NOTHING to do with that case, yet they keep attacking me over it.  I guess I will always be hated for that, & will never lived that down.  lol...But, it's ok, people are very heated over that case & apparently still are. There ARE two sides to that case. 

 I will go back & re-read what you quoted to me.  You did mention that case, not me.  Just bringing up that case, stirs it up again.  But, just like this thread says.  People DOES have ever right to their own opinions & should be able to post it, without any attacks on them.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 You wrote all this, yet couldn't answer the direct question I posed to you, in this thread?

I don't have anything to say, that I haven't already said.  I did not bring up TM/GZ  to talk about it with you.  I will also no longer derail the OP's post by responding to you about TM/GZ in this post. 

In fact, I will just refrain from responding to you in general. 

 

Quoting Naturewoman4:

Look TCgirlatheart, I'm not going to keep defending my opinions & posts on the T/Z case.  I stick by what I say, say what you want.  Just like I'm sure you all will keep on saying & sticking by your posts.  Your opinions & thoughts.  I stick my mine.  Attack me all your want, but it's not going to change my mind.  I can say A LOT in that regard, to what others think on that case.  But, I don't want to.  We're past that or should be.  I get it ok.  I get that what I have posted over & over during that time, A LOT don't like.

  A LOT are upset over what I have posted & my opinions on this case.  So, what do you want me to say now?  Hate me if you want, call me names if you want.  It won't change a thing.  I can't do the same towards those that think differently then I do.  But, I don't.  But, IF I have to, I will.  Let it go already, it's past.  I'm sure after the Elections, this will all heat up again.  Do you notice & I know a few people that feel the way I do, don't post in ANY of those T/Z's post anymore nor would they.  A few I'm still friends with.  They don't & the reason is because it's all BS. 

 I have even met a few 'black' friends since the days of those posts.  They have said the same.  They even advise me to stay out of those posts.  They don't believe the same of what you & others have said.  Whenever I 'use to' look up any polls or read other people's views on the case.  Polls are stating the fact that Americans feel it was self-defense.  Others aren't sure yet.  Then, lastly there's that believe he's guilty.  I don't usually go by polls though.  I was just curious.  I go to sometimes, other places where there's debates still going on over this.  It's about half & half. 

 So, you see I'm NOT the only one that feels this way.  Just on CM, people that believe what I believe stays away from those posts.  I eventually did as well.  Because, it's hard to debate with such hateful people, & when I was in the majority.  Most of the time, it was about 20 people & only me.  That's not a debate.  Which I hung there alone, pretty long LOL...I guess, that's how stubborn I can be.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 That's what I thought, and frankly was shocked.  Though, I should consider the source. 

As I read further, I did see the retraction and your explanation to NW, and her response showing that she doesn't understand the difference.  I think we all learned that on the TM/GZ posts. 

Now I see how this post got so large so quickly.  *sigh*

Quoting Sisteract:

Attacking others for their opinions.

OHgirl is good- NW retracted that assertion.

I explained the difference between stating an opinion and stating an opinion and attaching rhetoric that is labeled "factual."

I think that most realize that not everything that you find on the Internet is actually factual.

IMO, refuting a non factual assertion is not attacking. Asking a question is not attacking.

It's not disrespectul to question assertions during a debate, others clearly disagree.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

What exactly are you accusing these two of??

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, I don't get it.  That's what a lot of people here on CM does, including you Sisteract & OHgirlinCA.  We ALL do that.  So, I think it's quite funny to hear people saying, that one doesn't have to be an A$$hole when posting our own opinions.  What I hear mostly is people that read one's OWN opinions, is the person that quotes them as being A$$holes.

  Attacking one's own point of view or facts that they put up, is one thing.  But, attacking a person personally is a cheap shot.  This forcus/debate group would certainly be a lot more fun, if EVERYONE would just refrain from attacking people personally.  Just attack what they are saying, with reasons WHY they disagree. 

Quoting Sisteract:

True

Quoting OHgirlinCA:

 People are entitled to their opinions, and people are also entitled to dismiss the opinion of others. 

However, IMO, having an opinion doesn't mean you have to be an asshole on how you present that opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

[Naturewoman4]

oops I mean 3 hrs!! LOL..Gee, I need to go take a nap. 

Quoting Sisteract:

How about time with your family?

I mainly work from 3-7PM- cover the dinner relief hours. Since I do not have any kids at home and my husband  often travels for work, these hours work well for me- plus no one else wants these hours. I literally could work everyday, if I wanted.

Quoting Naturewoman4:

I'm actually considering taking this job, that cares for a 82 yr. old woman.  They want me there for 3 yrs. a day, but 7 days a wk.  They'll pay me $15/hr. though.  So, I'm thinking that's pretty good money.  Plus, I can still go to my gym & do my volunteer work.  :)

Quoting Sisteract:

NW- why did your husband retire from a union job if he still needed to work and support a family?

 

[TCgirlatheart]

 I highlighted my original question to you in red.  It's in this very tree.

I also highlighted the part where I said, that I didn't bring up TM/GZ in order to talk about it, and will elaborate to say, that I only brought it up as a reference point.

Get some sleep, and don't worry about it.  I think it wound up answering itself later.

Quoting Naturewoman4:

I'm sorry TCgirlatheart, I have no idea what you are talking about.  It could be that I didn't sleep well (because of my older dog), & went to bed around 3:30am.  What questions did you have for me again, over this thread? 

I thought YOU did bring up the TM/GZ case & my posts.  Perhaps, I'm ore tired than I thought.  Actually, I haven't wanted to talk about that case for a long time now, yet people just pop into posts that has NOTHING to do with that case, yet they keep attacking me over it.  I guess I will always be hated for that, & will never lived that down.  lol...But, it's ok, people are very heated over that case & apparently still are.  I will go back & re-read what you quoted to me.  I think you did....

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 You wrote all this, yet couldn't answer the direct question I posed to you, in this thread?

I don't have anything to say, that I haven't already said.  I did not bring up TM/GZ  to talk about it with you.  I will also no longer derail the OP's post by responding to you about TM/GZ in this post. 

In fact, I will just refrain from responding to you in general. 

 

Quoting Naturewoman4:

Look TCgirlatheart, I'm not going to keep defending my opinions & posts on the T/Z case.  I stick by what I say, say what you want.  Just like I'm sure you all will keep on saying & sticking by your posts.  Your opinions & thoughts.  I stick my mine.  Attack me all your want, but it's not going to change my mind.  I can say A LOT in that regard, to what others think on that case.  But, I don't want to.  We're past that or should be.  I get it ok.  I get that what I have posted over & over during that time, A LOT don't like.

  A LOT are upset over what I have posted & my opinions on this case.  So, what do you want me to say now?  Hate me if you want, call me names if you want.  It won't change a thing.  I can't do the same towards those that think differently then I do.  But, I don't.  But, IF I have to, I will.  Let it go already, it's past.  I'm sure after the Elections, this will all heat up again.  Do you notice & I know a few people that feel the way I do, don't post in ANY of those T/Z's post anymore nor would they.  A few I'm still friends with.  They don't & the reason is because it's all BS. 

 I have even met a few 'black' friends since the days of those posts.  They have said the same.  They even advise me to stay out of those posts.  They don't believe the same of what you & others have said.  Whenever I 'use to' look up any polls or read other people's views on the case.  Polls are stating the fact that Americans feel it was self-defense.  Others aren't sure yet.  Then, lastly there's that believe he's guilty.  I don't usually go by polls though.  I was just curious.  I go to sometimes, other places where there's debates still going on over this.  It's about half & half. 

 So, you see I'm NOT the only one that feels this way.  Just on CM, people that believe what I believe stays away from those posts.  I eventually did as well.  Because, it's hard to debate with such hateful people, & when I was in the majority.  Most of the time, it was about 20 people & only me.  That's not a debate.  Which I hung there alone, pretty long LOL...I guess, that's how stubborn I can be.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 That's what I thought, and frankly was shocked.  Though, I should consider the source. 

As I read further, I did see the retraction and your explanation to NW, and her response showing that she doesn't understand the difference.  I think we all learned that on the TM/GZ posts. 

Now I see how this post got so large so quickly.  *sigh*

Quoting Sisteract:

Attacking others for their opinions.

OHgirl is good- NW retracted that assertion.

I explained the difference between stating an opinion and stating an opinion and attaching rhetoric that is labeled "factual."

I think that most realize that not everything that you find on the Internet is actually factual.

IMO, refuting a non factual assertion is not attacking. Asking a question is not attacking.

It's not disrespectul to question assertions during a debate, others clearly disagree.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

What exactly are you accusing these two of??

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, I don't get it.  That's what a lot of people here on CM does, including you Sisteract & OHgirlinCA.  We ALL do that.  So, I think it's quite funny to hear people saying, that one doesn't have to be an A$$hole when posting our own opinions.  What I hear mostly is people that read one's OWN opinions, is the person that quotes them as being A$$holes.

  Attacking one's own point of view or facts that they put up, is one thing.  But, attacking a person personally is a cheap shot.  This forcus/debate group would certainly be a lot more fun, if EVERYONE would just refrain from attacking people personally.  Just attack what they are saying, with reasons WHY they disagree. 

Quoting Sisteract:

True

Quoting OHgirlinCA:

 People are entitled to their opinions, and people are also entitled to dismiss the opinion of others. 

However, IMO, having an opinion doesn't mean you have to be an asshole on how you present that opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Naturewoman4]

Ok TCgirlatheart, I missed this quote of yours.  First, I don't know why YOU have to ask me that.  IF it were you I was speaking about ok, I understand that.  What I am referring to is, that Sisteract and A LOT others have attacked people personally, for just stating their opinions in a respectful way.  I don't think Sisteract would deny that.  Heck, almost everyone does that. 

 That's the nature of this group.  I personally haven't done that in the past, but in order to be in this group, I guess that's what one has to do to survive here. lol  People may hate what I have said in my posts, but I NEVER attacked people personally.  BIG difference to me.  I have attacked people 'outside of CM' that involves certain high profile cases YES, but I don't attack others that attack me nor do I attack them personally.   

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

What exactly are you accusing these two of??

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, I don't get it.  That's what a lot of people here on CM does, including you Sisteract & OHgirlinCA.  We ALL do that.  So, I think it's quite funny to hear people saying, that one doesn't have to be an A$$hole when posting our own opinions.  What I hear mostly is people that read one's OWN opinions, is the person that quotes them as being A$$holes.

  Attacking one's own point of view or facts that they put up, is one thing.  But, attacking a person personally is a cheap shot.  This forcus/debate group would certainly be a lot more fun, if EVERYONE would just refrain from attacking people personally.  Just attack what they are saying, with reasons WHY they disagree. 

Quoting Sisteract:

True

Quoting OHgirlinCA:

 People are entitled to their opinions, and people are also entitled to dismiss the opinion of others. 

However, IMO, having an opinion doesn't mean you have to be an asshole on how you present that opinion.

 

[Naturewoman4]

But, perhaps I'm wrong on this.  But, when a person even brings up the words TM/GZ don't you think that stirs up things in people?  Especially, with me since I've been the target in this issue?  I didn't bring those words up, you did.  I know now, you were just using it as an example of my posts.  Which btw what was wrong with my posts in that thread?  I just said how I felt & my opinion in that case.  I don't see anything wrong with that.  I guess I am tired, but I still don't get it where you don't think there wouldn't be any reaction once you even mention that case (names). 

 I don't even get what you are referring to.  This thread to me is saying, that YOU DO have every right to post your opinions without being personally attack.  Which I am pretty much all the time.  So, I don't see what you are saying here. 

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 I highlighted my original question to you in red.  It's in this very tree.

I also highlighted the part where I said, that I didn't bring up TM/GZ in order to talk about it, and will elaborate to say, that I only brought it up as a reference point.

Get some sleep, and don't worry about it.  I think it wound up answering itself later.

Quoting Naturewoman4:

I'm sorry TCgirlatheart, I have no idea what you are talking about.  It could be that I didn't sleep well (because of my older dog), & went to bed around 3:30am.  What questions did you have for me again, over this thread? 

I thought YOU did bring up the TM/GZ case & my posts.  Perhaps, I'm ore tired than I thought.  Actually, I haven't wanted to talk about that case for a long time now, yet people just pop into posts that has NOTHING to do with that case, yet they keep attacking me over it.  I guess I will always be hated for that, & will never lived that down.  lol...But, it's ok, people are very heated over that case & apparently still are.  I will go back & re-read what you quoted to me.  I think you did....

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 You wrote all this, yet couldn't answer the direct question I posed to you, in this thread?

I don't have anything to say, that I haven't already said.  I did not bring up TM/GZ  to talk about it with you.  I will also no longer derail the OP's post by responding to you about TM/GZ in this post. 

In fact, I will just refrain from responding to you in general. 

 

Quoting Naturewoman4:

Look TCgirlatheart, I'm not going to keep defending my opinions & posts on the T/Z case.  I stick by what I say, say what you want.  Just like I'm sure you all will keep on saying & sticking by your posts.  Your opinions & thoughts.  I stick my mine.  Attack me all your want, but it's not going to change my mind.  I can say A LOT in that regard, to what others think on that case.  But, I don't want to.  We're past that or should be.  I get it ok.  I get that what I have posted over & over during that time, A LOT don't like.

  A LOT are upset over what I have posted & my opinions on this case.  So, what do you want me to say now?  Hate me if you want, call me names if you want.  It won't change a thing.  I can't do the same towards those that think differently then I do.  But, I don't.  But, IF I have to, I will.  Let it go already, it's past.  I'm sure after the Elections, this will all heat up again.  Do you notice & I know a few people that feel the way I do, don't post in ANY of those T/Z's post anymore nor would they.  A few I'm still friends with.  They don't & the reason is because it's all BS. 

 I have even met a few 'black' friends since the days of those posts.  They have said the same.  They even advise me to stay out of those posts.  They don't believe the same of what you & others have said.  Whenever I 'use to' look up any polls or read other people's views on the case.  Polls are stating the fact that Americans feel it was self-defense.  Others aren't sure yet.  Then, lastly there's that believe he's guilty.  I don't usually go by polls though.  I was just curious.  I go to sometimes, other places where there's debates still going on over this.  It's about half & half. 

 So, you see I'm NOT the only one that feels this way.  Just on CM, people that believe what I believe stays away from those posts.  I eventually did as well.  Because, it's hard to debate with such hateful people, & when I was in the majority.  Most of the time, it was about 20 people & only me.  That's not a debate.  Which I hung there alone, pretty long LOL...I guess, that's how stubborn I can be.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 That's what I thought, and frankly was shocked.  Though, I should consider the source. 

As I read further, I did see the retraction and your explanation to NW, and her response showing that she doesn't understand the difference.  I think we all learned that on the TM/GZ posts. 

Now I see how this post got so large so quickly.  *sigh*

Quoting Sisteract:

Attacking others for their opinions.

OHgirl is good- NW retracted that assertion.

I explained the difference between stating an opinion and stating an opinion and attaching rhetoric that is labeled "factual."

I think that most realize that not everything that you find on the Internet is actually factual.

IMO, refuting a non factual assertion is not attacking. Asking a question is not attacking.

It's not disrespectul to question assertions during a debate, others clearly disagree.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

What exactly are you accusing these two of??

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, I don't get it.  That's what a lot of people here on CM does, including you Sisteract & OHgirlinCA.  We ALL do that.  So, I think it's quite funny to hear people saying, that one doesn't have to be an A$$hole when posting our own opinions.  What I hear mostly is people that read one's OWN opinions, is the person that quotes them as being A$$holes.

  Attacking one's own point of view or facts that they put up, is one thing.  But, attacking a person personally is a cheap shot.  This forcus/debate group would certainly be a lot more fun, if EVERYONE would just refrain from attacking people personally.  Just attack what they are saying, with reasons WHY they disagree. 

Quoting Sisteract:

True

Quoting OHgirlinCA:

 People are entitled to their opinions, and people are also entitled to dismiss the opinion of others. 

However, IMO, having an opinion doesn't mean you have to be an asshole on how you present that opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TCgirlatheart]

 You don't need to know why I ask anything on a public forum.  Although, I did express why I asked it later in this very tree.

You are wrong about both of those ladies, and blaming the group CE&HT for how you write and respond to people is ridiculous.  Many women on this board, "survive" just fine without changing how they respond to people, no matter what group they're in. 

ETA: Actually, now I see that you edited out the part where I expressed my reason for asking.  It IS in the original tree.

Quoting Naturewoman4:

Ok TCgirlatheart, I missed this quote of yours.  First, I don't know why YOU have to ask me that.  IF it were you I was speaking about ok, I understand that.  What I am referring to is, that Sisteract and A LOT others have attacked people personally, for just stating their opinions in a respectful way.  I don't think Sisteract would deny that.  Heck, almost everyone does that. 

 That's the nature of this group.  I personally haven't done that in the past, but in order to be in this group, I guess that's what one has to do to survive here. lol  People may hate what I have said in my posts, but I NEVER attacked people personally.  BIG difference to me.  I have attacked people 'outside of CM' that involves certain high profile cases YES, but I don't attack others that attack me nor do I attack them personally.   

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

What exactly are you accusing these two of??

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, I don't get it.  That's what a lot of people here on CM does, including you Sisteract & OHgirlinCA.  We ALL do that.  So, I think it's quite funny to hear people saying, that one doesn't have to be an A$$hole when posting our own opinions.  What I hear mostly is people that read one's OWN opinions, is the person that quotes them as being A$$holes.

  Attacking one's own point of view or facts that they put up, is one thing.  But, attacking a person personally is a cheap shot.  This forcus/debate group would certainly be a lot more fun, if EVERYONE would just refrain from attacking people personally.  Just attack what they are saying, with reasons WHY they disagree. 

Quoting Sisteract:

True

Quoting OHgirlinCA:

 People are entitled to their opinions, and people are also entitled to dismiss the opinion of others. 

However, IMO, having an opinion doesn't mean you have to be an asshole on how you present that opinion.

 

 

 

[TCgirlatheart]

 What??

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, perhaps I'm wrong on this.  But, when a person even brings up the words TM/GZ don't you think that stirs up things in people?  Especially, with me since I've been the target in this issue?  I didn't bring those words up, you did.  I know now, you were just using it as an example of my posts.  Which btw what was wrong with my posts in that thread?  I just said how I felt & my opinion in that case.  I don't see anything wrong with that.  I guess I am tired, but I still don't get it where you don't think there wouldn't be any reaction once you even mention that case (names). 

 I don't even get what you are referring to.  This thread to me is saying, that YOU DO have every right to post your opinions without being personally attack.  Which I am pretty much all the time.  So, I don't see what you are saying here. 

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 I highlighted my original question to you in red.  It's in this very tree.

I also highlighted the part where I said, that I didn't bring up TM/GZ in order to talk about it, and will elaborate to say, that I only brought it up as a reference point.

Get some sleep, and don't worry about it.  I think it wound up answering itself later.

Quoting Naturewoman4:

I'm sorry TCgirlatheart, I have no idea what you are talking about.  It could be that I didn't sleep well (because of my older dog), & went to bed around 3:30am.  What questions did you have for me again, over this thread? 

I thought YOU did bring up the TM/GZ case & my posts.  Perhaps, I'm ore tired than I thought.  Actually, I haven't wanted to talk about that case for a long time now, yet people just pop into posts that has NOTHING to do with that case, yet they keep attacking me over it.  I guess I will always be hated for that, & will never lived that down.  lol...But, it's ok, people are very heated over that case & apparently still are.  I will go back & re-read what you quoted to me.  I think you did....

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 You wrote all this, yet couldn't answer the direct question I posed to you, in this thread?

I don't have anything to say, that I haven't already said.  I did not bring up TM/GZ  to talk about it with you.  I will also no longer derail the OP's post by responding to you about TM/GZ in this post. 

In fact, I will just refrain from responding to you in general. 

 

Quoting Naturewoman4:

Look TCgirlatheart, I'm not going to keep defending my opinions & posts on the T/Z case.  I stick by what I say, say what you want.  Just like I'm sure you all will keep on saying & sticking by your posts.  Your opinions & thoughts.  I stick my mine.  Attack me all your want, but it's not going to change my mind.  I can say A LOT in that regard, to what others think on that case.  But, I don't want to.  We're past that or should be.  I get it ok.  I get that what I have posted over & over during that time, A LOT don't like.

  A LOT are upset over what I have posted & my opinions on this case.  So, what do you want me to say now?  Hate me if you want, call me names if you want.  It won't change a thing.  I can't do the same towards those that think differently then I do.  But, I don't.  But, IF I have to, I will.  Let it go already, it's past.  I'm sure after the Elections, this will all heat up again.  Do you notice & I know a few people that feel the way I do, don't post in ANY of those T/Z's post anymore nor would they.  A few I'm still friends with.  They don't & the reason is because it's all BS. 

 I have even met a few 'black' friends since the days of those posts.  They have said the same.  They even advise me to stay out of those posts.  They don't believe the same of what you & others have said.  Whenever I 'use to' look up any polls or read other people's views on the case.  Polls are stating the fact that Americans feel it was self-defense.  Others aren't sure yet.  Then, lastly there's that believe he's guilty.  I don't usually go by polls though.  I was just curious.  I go to sometimes, other places where there's debates still going on over this.  It's about half & half. 

 So, you see I'm NOT the only one that feels this way.  Just on CM, people that believe what I believe stays away from those posts.  I eventually did as well.  Because, it's hard to debate with such hateful people, & when I was in the majority.  Most of the time, it was about 20 people & only me.  That's not a debate.  Which I hung there alone, pretty long LOL...I guess, that's how stubborn I can be.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 That's what I thought, and frankly was shocked.  Though, I should consider the source. 

As I read further, I did see the retraction and your explanation to NW, and her response showing that she doesn't understand the difference.  I think we all learned that on the TM/GZ posts. 

Now I see how this post got so large so quickly.  *sigh*

Quoting Sisteract:

Attacking others for their opinions.

OHgirl is good- NW retracted that assertion.

I explained the difference between stating an opinion and stating an opinion and attaching rhetoric that is labeled "factual."

I think that most realize that not everything that you find on the Internet is actually factual.

IMO, refuting a non factual assertion is not attacking. Asking a question is not attacking.

It's not disrespectul to question assertions during a debate, others clearly disagree.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

What exactly are you accusing these two of??

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, I don't get it.  That's what a lot of people here on CM does, including you Sisteract & OHgirlinCA.  We ALL do that.  So, I think it's quite funny to hear people saying, that one doesn't have to be an A$$hole when posting our own opinions.  What I hear mostly is people that read one's OWN opinions, is the person that quotes them as being A$$holes.

  Attacking one's own point of view or facts that they put up, is one thing.  But, attacking a person personally is a cheap shot.  This forcus/debate group would certainly be a lot more fun, if EVERYONE would just refrain from attacking people personally.  Just attack what they are saying, with reasons WHY they disagree. 

Quoting Sisteract:

True

Quoting OHgirlinCA:

 People are entitled to their opinions, and people are also entitled to dismiss the opinion of others. 

However, IMO, having an opinion doesn't mean you have to be an asshole on how you present that opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Naturewoman4]

Look TCgirlatheart, just because you or others may say how I respond to people (due to THEIR rude attacks on me for just stating my opinion) & how I post is ridiculous, that's just your opinion.  When others, including myself can say the same.  That your or others that respond to me & how they post is 'ridiculous' to me AND to others.  So, this is just a back & forth thing.  Why get so upset over this?  It's CM.

  Everyone has their own RIGHT to post how they feel & their opinions on whatever the subject matter is in the thread.  Just because you or other people, HATE & it UPSETS you so much that I say something that gets you so mad, the fact I disgree doesn't mean that YOU are right & I am WRONG.  There's 2 sides to an issue.  Do you know that don't you?

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 You don't need to know why I ask anything on a public forum.  Although, I did express why I asked it later in this very tree.

You are wrong about both of those ladies, and blaming the group CE&HT for how you write and respond to people is ridiculous.  Many women on this board, "survive" just fine without changing how they respond to people, no matter what group they're in. 

ETA: Actually, now I see that you edited out the part where I expressed my reason for asking.  It IS in the original tree.

Quoting Naturewoman4:

Ok TCgirlatheart, I missed this quote of yours.  First, I don't know why YOU have to ask me that.  IF it were you I was speaking about ok, I understand that.  What I am referring to is, that Sisteract and A LOT others have attacked people personally, for just stating their opinions in a respectful way.  I don't think Sisteract would deny that.  Heck, almost everyone does that. 

 That's the nature of this group.  I personally haven't done that in the past, but in order to be in this group, I guess that's what one has to do to survive here. lol  People may hate what I have said in my posts, but I NEVER attacked people personally.  BIG difference to me.  I have attacked people 'outside of CM' that involves certain high profile cases YES, but I don't attack others that attack me nor do I attack them personally.   

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

What exactly are you accusing these two of??

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, I don't get it.  That's what a lot of people here on CM does, including you Sisteract & OHgirlinCA.  We ALL do that.  So, I think it's quite funny to hear people saying, that one doesn't have to be an A$$hole when posting our own opinions.  What I hear mostly is people that read one's OWN opinions, is the person that quotes them as being A$$holes.

  Attacking one's own point of view or facts that they put up, is one thing.  But, attacking a person personally is a cheap shot.  This forcus/debate group would certainly be a lot more fun, if EVERYONE would just refrain from attacking people personally.  Just attack what they are saying, with reasons WHY they disagree. 

Quoting Sisteract:

True

Quoting OHgirlinCA:

 People are entitled to their opinions, and people are also entitled to dismiss the opinion of others. 

However, IMO, having an opinion doesn't mean you have to be an asshole on how you present that opinion.

 

 

 

[Sisteract]

You have expressed your hatred for liberals, NW.  You have also admitted to having issues with people of other races and ethnicities- and have blamed your "feeling" on Obama. Please do not use the coy and innocent ploy- I think anyone who has spent time on this forum knows that you like to stir the pot. You also refuse to acknowledge when the stuff you copy and paste is proven and shown to be inaccurate, bias and untrue. Effective debate involves admitting when you have been proven wrong. NW, you have proven that you are unable to be objective in this regard.

And, this comment will be found as an attack on NW-

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, perhaps I'm wrong on this.  But, when a person even brings up the words TM/GZ don't you think that stirs up things in people?  Especially, with me since I've been the target in this issue?  I didn't bring those words up, you did.  I know now, you were just using it as an example of my posts.  Which btw what was wrong with my posts in that thread?  I just said how I felt & my opinion in that case.  I don't see anything wrong with that.  I guess I am tired, but I still don't get it where you don't think there wouldn't be any reaction once you even mention that case (names). 

 I don't even get what you are referring to.  This thread to me is saying, that YOU DO have every right to post your opinions without being personally attack.  Which I am pretty much all the time.  So, I don't see what you are saying here. 

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 I highlighted my original question to you in red.  It's in this very tree.

I also highlighted the part where I said, that I didn't bring up TM/GZ in order to talk about it, and will elaborate to say, that I only brought it up as a reference point.

Get some sleep, and don't worry about it.  I think it wound up answering itself later.

Quoting Naturewoman4:

I'm sorry TCgirlatheart, I have no idea what you are talking about.  It could be that I didn't sleep well (because of my older dog), & went to bed around 3:30am.  What questions did you have for me again, over this thread? 

I thought YOU did bring up the TM/GZ case & my posts.  Perhaps, I'm ore tired than I thought.  Actually, I haven't wanted to talk about that case for a long time now, yet people just pop into posts that has NOTHING to do with that case, yet they keep attacking me over it.  I guess I will always be hated for that, & will never lived that down.  lol...But, it's ok, people are very heated over that case & apparently still are.  I will go back & re-read what you quoted to me.  I think you did....

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 You wrote all this, yet couldn't answer the direct question I posed to you, in this thread?

I don't have anything to say, that I haven't already said.  I did not bring up TM/GZ  to talk about it with you.  I will also no longer derail the OP's post by responding to you about TM/GZ in this post. 

In fact, I will just refrain from responding to you in general. 

 

Quoting Naturewoman4:

Look TCgirlatheart, I'm not going to keep defending my opinions & posts on the T/Z case.  I stick by what I say, say what you want.  Just like I'm sure you all will keep on saying & sticking by your posts.  Your opinions & thoughts.  I stick my mine.  Attack me all your want, but it's not going to change my mind.  I can say A LOT in that regard, to what others think on that case.  But, I don't want to.  We're past that or should be.  I get it ok.  I get that what I have posted over & over during that time, A LOT don't like.

  A LOT are upset over what I have posted & my opinions on this case.  So, what do you want me to say now?  Hate me if you want, call me names if you want.  It won't change a thing.  I can't do the same towards those that think differently then I do.  But, I don't.  But, IF I have to, I will.  Let it go already, it's past.  I'm sure after the Elections, this will all heat up again.  Do you notice & I know a few people that feel the way I do, don't post in ANY of those T/Z's post anymore nor would they.  A few I'm still friends with.  They don't & the reason is because it's all BS. 

 I have even met a few 'black' friends since the days of those posts.  They have said the same.  They even advise me to stay out of those posts.  They don't believe the same of what you & others have said.  Whenever I 'use to' look up any polls or read other people's views on the case.  Polls are stating the fact that Americans feel it was self-defense.  Others aren't sure yet.  Then, lastly there's that believe he's guilty.  I don't usually go by polls though.  I was just curious.  I go to sometimes, other places where there's debates still going on over this.  It's about half & half. 

 So, you see I'm NOT the only one that feels this way.  Just on CM, people that believe what I believe stays away from those posts.  I eventually did as well.  Because, it's hard to debate with such hateful people, & when I was in the majority.  Most of the time, it was about 20 people & only me.  That's not a debate.  Which I hung there alone, pretty long LOL...I guess, that's how stubborn I can be.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 That's what I thought, and frankly was shocked.  Though, I should consider the source. 

As I read further, I did see the retraction and your explanation to NW, and her response showing that she doesn't understand the difference.  I think we all learned that on the TM/GZ posts. 

Now I see how this post got so large so quickly.  *sigh*

Quoting Sisteract:

Attacking others for their opinions.

OHgirl is good- NW retracted that assertion.

I explained the difference between stating an opinion and stating an opinion and attaching rhetoric that is labeled "factual."

I think that most realize that not everything that you find on the Internet is actually factual.

IMO, refuting a non factual assertion is not attacking. Asking a question is not attacking.

It's not disrespectul to question assertions during a debate, others clearly disagree.

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

What exactly are you accusing these two of??

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, I don't get it.  That's what a lot of people here on CM does, including you Sisteract & OHgirlinCA.  We ALL do that.  So, I think it's quite funny to hear people saying, that one doesn't have to be an A$$hole when posting our own opinions.  What I hear mostly is people that read one's OWN opinions, is the person that quotes them as being A$$holes.

  Attacking one's own point of view or facts that they put up, is one thing.  But, attacking a person personally is a cheap shot.  This forcus/debate group would certainly be a lot more fun, if EVERYONE would just refrain from attacking people personally.  Just attack what they are saying, with reasons WHY they disagree. 

Quoting Sisteract:

True

Quoting OHgirlinCA:

 People are entitled to their opinions, and people are also entitled to dismiss the opinion of others. 

However, IMO, having an opinion doesn't mean you have to be an asshole on how you present that opinion.

 

 

 

[TCgirlatheart]

What does this have to do with what I said? Is just all how you feel and think I feel? Yes or no answer please.

Quoting Naturewoman4:

Look TCgirlatheart, just because you or others may say how I respond to people (due to THEIR rude attacks on me for just stating my opinion) & how I post is ridiculous, that's just your opinion.  When others, including myself can say the same.  That your or others that respond to me & how they post is 'ridiculous' to me AND to others.  So, this is just a back & forth thing.  Why get so upset over this?  It's CM.

  Everyone has their own RIGHT to post how they feel & their opinions on whatever the subject matter is in the thread.  Just because you or other people, HATE & it UPSETS you so much that I say something that gets you so mad, the fact I disgree doesn't mean that YOU are right & I am WRONG.  There's 2 sides to an issue.  Do you know that don't you?

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

 You don't need to know why I ask anything on a public forum.  Although, I did express why I asked it later in this very tree.

You are wrong about both of those ladies, and blaming the group CE&HT for how you write and respond to people is ridiculous.  Many women on this board, "survive" just fine without changing how they respond to people, no matter what group they're in. 

ETA: Actually, now I see that you edited out the part where I expressed my reason for asking.  It IS in the original tree.

Quoting Naturewoman4:

Ok TCgirlatheart, I missed this quote of yours.  First, I don't know why YOU have to ask me that.  IF it were you I was speaking about ok, I understand that.  What I am referring to is, that Sisteract and A LOT others have attacked people personally, for just stating their opinions in a respectful way.  I don't think Sisteract would deny that.  Heck, almost everyone does that. 

 That's the nature of this group.  I personally haven't done that in the past, but in order to be in this group, I guess that's what one has to do to survive here. lol  People may hate what I have said in my posts, but I NEVER attacked people personally.  BIG difference to me.  I have attacked people 'outside of CM' that involves certain high profile cases YES, but I don't attack others that attack me nor do I attack them personally.   

Quoting TCgirlatheart:

What exactly are you accusing these two of??

Quoting Naturewoman4:

But, I don't get it.  That's what a lot of people here on CM does, including you Sisteract & OHgirlinCA.  We ALL do that.  So, I think it's quite funny to hear people saying, that one doesn't have to be an A$$hole when posting our own opinions.  What I hear mostly is people that read one's OWN opinions, is the person that quotes them as being A$$holes.

  Attacking one's own point of view or facts that they put up, is one thing.  But, attacking a person personally is a cheap shot.  This forcus/debate group would certainly be a lot more fun, if EVERYONE would just refrain from attacking people personally.  Just attack what they are saying, with reasons WHY they disagree. 

Quoting Sisteract:

True

Quoting OHgirlinCA:

 People are entitled to their opinions, and people are also entitled to dismiss the opinion of others. 

However, IMO, having an opinion doesn't mean you have to be an asshole on how you present that opinion.