This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.

Q&A with MyTie

Post by OverZealous

Post by MyTie

I know that you love debates over the web, especially on Wowhead, but have you participated in any serious debates IRL? That is, not over a glass of beer with a few friends - but something more serious; a debate club or whatever, though I wouldn't know if you have those over in the U.S.

No, but we do have debate clubs.

I'm not nearly as eloquent in person as I am on wowhead. When I write a post, I take time to chose each word, and very often go back and change my post numerous times before actually posting it.

______________________________________________________

Here is an example of the evolution of a post:

Abortion is a terrible thing to do and there isn't any reason for it.

Regardless of legal status, abortion is a horrible choice, and I have yet to see a morally superior reason to choose abortion over any other option.

The current contraceptive debate has been framed around the mother's right to contraception. However, no one is questioning a woman's right to aquire contraception, just her responsibility to buy it herself.

The current contraceptive debate has been framed around the mother's fundamental right to contraception. This is especially remarkable to me, as I have seen no one questioning a woman's right to acquire contraception. I have seen no instance of a person arguing that a woman cannot buy birth control, or get her tubes tied. Just her responsibility to buy it herself.

The current contraceptive debate has been framed around the mother's fundamental right to contraception. This is especially remarkable to me, as I have seen no one questioning a woman's right to acquire contraception. I have seen no instance of a person arguing, for instance, that a woman cannot buy birth control, or get her tubes tied. The only public insistence is that people should provide for their own health care, in this case, a woman's contraceptive care. This has allowed a framing of those opposed to the funding of health care, as sexist bigots who want to deny a woman's right to contraceptive. But why?

The current contraceptive debate has been framed around the mother's fundamental right to contraception. This is especially remarkable to me, as I have seen no one questioning a woman's right to acquire contraception. I have seen no instance of a person arguing, for instance, that a woman cannot buy birth control, or get her tubes tied. The only public insistence is that people should provide for their own health care, in this case, a woman's contraceptive care. This has allowed a framing of those opposed to the funding of health care, as sexist bigots who want to deny a woman's right to contraceptive. But why? Why is there such a push to get others to pay for contraception? It can be tied to aboriton.

The current contraceptive debate has been framed around the mother's fundamental right to contraception. This is especially remarkable to me, as I have seen no one questioning a woman's right to acquire contraception. I have seen no instance of a person arguing, for instance, that a woman cannot buy birth control, or get her tubes tied. The only public insistence is that people should provide for their own health care, in this case, a woman's contraceptive care. This has allowed a framing of those opposed to the funding of health care, as sexist bigots who want to deny a woman's right to contraceptive. But why? Why is there such a push to get others to fund contraception? I believe the reason is, if there is a public mandate that funds all contraception, then the funding of abortion will be easier to include, or later insist on.

______________________________________________________________

So, as you can see, my wording changes. This works very well online, or when forming speeches. I'm very good at public speaking. I've given hundreds of speeches, and I've never had one poorly received. I've taught a few classes, but I'm not as good at that, because I'm not good at adapting my material "on the spot". I'd only do well in a debate if someone "walked into" a territory I was prepared for. I admit that many times on wowhead, someone says something I'm not prepared for, and I have to do some research before I can adequately respond to their position, or adapt my argument. Also, I can get emotional, and wowhead allows me to take a few minutes, breath deep, and think about the issue without emotion.

I don't even really debate "informally". I'm a quiet guy, and I get shouted down most times I've tried it. The other problem is if someone starts talking about something that doesn't interest me, I'm obliged to sit and listen to them. If someone starts being boring on wowhead I just don't read their post.

Post by donnymurph

If it isn't yours, don't touch it.

Okay, but assuming you are given permission to paint, on something other than a traditional canvas, do you think it has artistic merit?

Post by gamerunknown

I've seen some really cool graffitti in Brighton. However MyTie said earlier he doesn't like anime and stuff...

What about stuff by Banksy?

Post by MyTie

I think graffiti holds its roots in my culture... for centuries... millenia even. Ancient Rome was known for having much of its political discourse, and other not niceties scrawled out on its walls. I think it is something that is a tradition. The art form itself, in the strictest sense, involves paint and walls. To that end, it is too variable to place my seal of "like" or "dislike" on. I've seen some nice stuff, no doubt. The majority of it is illegible garbage. I think it is pretty stupid to go spray paint your name, or your gang's name on a train car or an office building. It generally makes the community look cheapened. In fact, many communities actively fight the graffiti. If it were done tastefully, it probably wouldn't be such a big deal.

So, gonna have to go with thumbs down. It's unwanted.

Post by Azazel

Do you think it's possible to be conservative (American) without being Christian? Especially if you are going for president or governor or something?

Post by donnymurph

What are you thoughts on obnoxious street preachers?
Do you think that they are cut from the same mould as other brands of hawker?
Do you feel that they are a bad reflection on the religion they are representing?
And lastly, does your opinion on the above vary from when the preacher is touting Christianity to when they are touting other religions?

Post by MyTie

Do you think it's possible to be conservative (American) without being Christian? Especially if you are going for president or governor or something?

I don't think your first two questions are related. Are you asking me if it is possible to be an electible conservative without being a Christian? Or are you asking me if it would be possible to hold conservative values without being a Christian? Suppose I'll answer both.

It is possible to be a Conservative without being a Christian. In fact, absent Christian values, conservatism still makes more sense than liberalism. Matters of fiscal restraint, personal freedom, right to life, small government, etc. These values are desirable not just due to religion, but because they make historical sense.

To be electible, as a conservative, it will certainly help to be a Christian, due to the ability of the electorate to identify with the candidate. However, I don't believe this is a requirement. I would vote for an atheist conservative. I don't care about their religion. It doesn't affect their ability to do their job.

I will say that I don't think it is possible to be liberal and be Christian, honestly Christian. If one were serious about their Christianity, they would know that they must study and follow the word of God. And, if one studies the word of God, they will see that they must obey it. The word of God is clear in matters of marriage, homosexuality, divorce, children, personal responsibility, etc. When I read somewhere where someone is insisting that Jesus was a liberal, because Jesus had a big heart and was liberals have a big heart, therefore Jesus must be liberal, I laugh. It's just more of the narcissistic arrogance of the American Left, to think that they are the kindest and most forgiving. They don't realize that the American Right holds the same values they do, but believes that these values are manifested in the individual, not the government. It's as if they believe "permission comes from government", and "Jesus would agree" go together. Ridiculous. Jesus would insist that justice comes from God, and probably ignore government and religious authorities, or rebuke them, who at that time crucified him. What are you thoughts on obnoxious street preachers?
Do you think that they are cut from the same mould as other brands of hawker?
Do you feel that they are a bad reflection on the religion they are representing?
And lastly, does your opinion on the above vary from when the preacher is touting Christianity to when they are touting other religions?

I suppose it would depend more on the street preacher's words than their location. I've never listened to a street preacher. I would think they would say different things depending on the preacher. I'm not going to say they are right and wrong, because I don't know. To the last question, I can't speak to other religions.

Post by gamerunknown

Mark 12:17.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/03/15/476914/-Who-killed-Liberation-Theology

Post by MyTie

Mark 12:17

The institution of marriage, sexuality, life, and most social positions are decidedly not belonging to Ceasar.

Edit: Because Q&A threads make wowhead regulars look like a cliche, I think that all Q&A threads should be locked. Therefore, I will no longer be responding to Qs in here, and ask for a mod to lock it. If anyone has any questions for my, my email is in my signature. (yourtie@live.com in case I change my sig)

Q&A with MyTie

Post Reply