It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How Can We Have Civil Conversations With The Other Side?

page: 7
12
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

Not really.

I was raised on the typical 'Merikan diet of fast food and pop and processed crap.

My diet today is totally remade and we cook our own stuff.

It constituted a massive lifestyle change.

Oh, horror! I changed. I know; hard for you to comprehend that a conservative can do that, and even do it voluntarily without a gun to my head.




posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Heck I can answer #1 based on my knowledge about people here - There are certain people on this site I'm far more comfortable engaging with in conversation because their beliefs and mine are more sympathetic to mine even knowing their ethnic background is much different than mine. That part doesn't matter because I know we have common ground to base our discourse off of. Certain other posters, even those of the same background as mine, are much more difficult to engage with because their beliefs make them far more antagonistic. Sometimes, they're tough to deal with even in the off-political topics.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

Lol

You guys really are a walking billboard for Trump 2020.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

Shhhhhh, they are doing a fine job resisting.

Let them be.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: ketsuko

I agree there change for the sake of it is pointless, still the only way to find solutions is through dialogue.


When most dialogue consists of calling someone who disagrees with you a Faux News, Trump cultist, racist, bigot, homophobe, Islamophobe, flyover, bitter clinger, moron, whatever slur they can think of (oh, yes, white supremacist Nazi, how could I forget), the dialogue is very, very short.

As I explained, who wants to have a conversation with people who do that? Why would you want to? People who come in with that attitude have already assumed they are intellectually and morally superior and are going to automatically discount everything that is said because of that attitude.

There are a few people on this site who don't take that tack. I can have productive dialogue with them.




That just comes down to the person though, if someone can't have a simple conversation without getting their panties in a twist there not worth bothering with, check my sig as an example.

I noticed though you didn't provide examples of the right loons description of the left, there's plenty of libtard, reee, tds, soy boy living in moms basement, gun grabber ,progressives Yada Yada Yada.

It pathetic, and the numpty I quoted in my signature doesn't have the language skills to even use pathetic in the right context.
edit on 30-7-2019 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed




You have bought into it hook line and sinker,


Says the person who regularly engages in the very same hard line I was illustrating......


Perhaps you instead, should go back through your old posts and be honest with yourself before addressing the issue
.....




Feel free to do that and quote me where I've done that.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

And if the person you are attempting to converse with hasn't used those terms? There's no whatabout there to discuss, is there? So why engage that way?

It's like saying "Well not all Trump supporters are racist, sure, but all racists are Trump supporters." So you feel free to treat every person you engage with as if they are a racist even if you feed them the pittance of admitting they may not be.

In this case you throw out the mud and then proceed to behave as though I've chucked it at you when you threw it.

I have yet to chuck mud at the moment.
edit on 30-7-2019 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

And if the person you are attempting to converse with hasn't used those terms? There's no whatabout there to discuss, is there? So why engage that way?




Do you think I engage people that way?

I find it difficult to deal and generally if someone approaches a conversation with me that way I tell them what I think and try and move on.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Please reread my thoughts. Sometimes I post before they complete themselves.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:16 PM
link   
The only time I ever see the left get conciliatory is when they're on the ropes on some issue.

then it's, "Why can't we be civil?"


For years I've been called a Nazi, a racist, deplorable etc. . .

I'm used to it because it's laughable.

Sure I've used soyboy, leftard, fascist, etc.

I mean. . . fair is fair, amirite?


As I've stated before, I won't ever compromise on the Constitution, Bill of Rights.

I'll compromise on what peanut butter to use or what dish soap to buy.

I'll compromise on what beer to drink.

I'm a wonderful person and easy-going when compromising on television programs.


But when you support legislation or legislators who would remove freedoms, infringe on rights, then there is no compromise. And you are the bad guy.

And I don't have to be "nice" to bad guys.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Get woke - Go broke

I'll have a conversation with anyone. If you're a democrat.. I'll still talk with you. Just know you are on the wrong side of history. Lets have another Beer!



Anyone remember ATS Around 'bamas first election? I seen people get banned for debating Craptic Overload (sp) and wrecking him. Good times. None of the old kats still here and its funny.
edit on 30-7-2019 by LeoStarchild because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: LeoStarchild

History doesn't have a side. For better or for worse, it simply is. The left thinks they can game the system by trying to tell everyone it's a foregone conclusion.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

There's a propensity here for massive blanket statements, so when the conversation has began with " rats are attracted to democrats cities" the conversation has already began with mud slinging and can only really stay in that direction.

I think it's the blanket statements that lead to these breakdowns in communication.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: LeoStarchild

History doesn't have a side. For better or for worse, it simply is. The left thinks they can game the system by trying to tell everyone it's a foregone conclusion.




Again another blanket statement, is this where I return in kind with the right think they can.......?



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Truth hurts though, I get it. Deep down the left knows what they want.. Is not in line with our country's core values.

Its called Cognitive dissonance.

You can't argue with that.
edit on 30-7-2019 by LeoStarchild because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-7-2019 by LeoStarchild because: spelling errrrs



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: LeoStarchild

Apparently truth is subjective.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: LeoStarchild

Apparently truth is subjective.


truth is always subjective.

Facts are not.



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Exactly..

It's when those facts form a truth these kids go REEE



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

But you're referencing another conversation. Not this one. This is a conversation about how to have a civil discourse.

I believe the comparison was made to cities crumbling and having serious rat problems and the fact that they are largely democrat run. The question becomes, how do democrat policies help socially if none of those cities are thriving? By any measure, even LA and San Fran and New York are only good places for the very rich.

And those voices in Congress who agitate the loudest for open borders and ever more poor voters also have some of the poorest districts in the country with some of the biggest issues -- like serious rat infestations.

If they cannot make improvements for their own people with the large amounts of money handed to their districts, then why take in more poor people to add to those we cannot help now and what good are they?



posted on Jul, 30 2019 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: LeoStarchild

Apparently truth is subjective.


truth is always subjective.

Facts are not.



Who was the public figure recently saying facts aren't facts. The lines are being purposefully blurred.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join