posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 05:51 PM
A while back I got into a heavy political discussion. Mud was slung in all directons by all parties involved. Bans were rattled in their scabbards.
But I asked specifically that my opponents not
Here's why: politics that excludes anyone
cannot be called democracy.
No matter how opposed I am to someone's viewpoint, no matter how biased or inaccurate someone is, I want them sitting- and talking- at the round
I want to hear what they really think, especially when they disagree, and then I want to formulate a policy that takes into account their
. Because if I exclude them, I will never know what they are thinking. Or have the opportunity to examine my own bias.
Universal suffrage is the greatest civilizing influence in sixty centuries of governance. ATS is the greatest example of universal freedom of speech
in that time. Let us exclude no one
The Legendary King Arthur knew the value of keeping one's friends close, and one's enemies closer. I think in this forum no one should be banned,
though profanity censors would make sense. Politics are best waged with scant decorum and less dishonesty.
I am thinking of the phrase 'the loyal opposition'. All hail ATS, and let the Games begin
A Few Possible Forums:
Natural Resources and Environment
Human Rights and Responsibilities
Food and Agriculture
Housing and Development
Defense and Diplomacy
[edit on 30-11-2004 by Chakotay]