How to make a John Kerry speech interesting:

[BlueTear]

Defender has a point. The world is not getting better, it's only getting more convenient.

So in your mind, the fact that during the past century, advances in industry, medicine and agriculture has made it possible for our population to increase from 1.6 billion to 6.5 billion means life has gotten more "convenient"?

 

 

 

I don't feel entirely out of my depth when I claim that refering to "not dying, but growing up forming a family and procreating" as a "convenience" is a gross understatement.

[MyPurpleCrayon]

So I've thought about it a lot more and actually completely changed my opinion:

 

 

 

Think about the 20 kids at Virginia Tech who died... What if that kid had pulled out a gun, or a knife? He deserved what he got, and I think the cops using over-aggressive force is okay in a situation like that, ESPECIALLY with all the shootings that are going on now. The cops shouldn't be responsible for what that student was capable of.

 

Going on some political tirade isn't any reason to suspect he would have a weapon. Even if for some reason they did think he had a weapon, it would have become clear he didn't when he was pinned on the ground for a few minutes by a couple cops. It would have been slightly different if they had used to taser to actually restrain him, though still unjustified, but at the point they did taser him he was restrained and clearly no real danger to anyone.

 

They had restrained him but were trying to put the cuffs on, and he wouldn't budge so they tased... The other option was getting beaten with one of their sticks cause he sure as hell wasn't moving.

[Darksavior69]

So I've thought about it a lot more and actually completely changed my opinion:

 

 

 

Think about the 20 kids at Virginia Tech who died... What if that kid had pulled out a gun, or a knife? He deserved what he got, and I think the cops using over-aggressive force is okay in a situation like that, ESPECIALLY with all the shootings that are going on now. The cops shouldn't be responsible for what that student was capable of.

 

Going on some political tirade isn't any reason to suspect he would have a weapon. Even if for some reason they did think he had a weapon, it would have become clear he didn't when he was pinned on the ground for a few minutes by a couple cops. It would have been slightly different if they had used to taser to actually restrain him, though still unjustified, but at the point they did taser him he was restrained and clearly no real danger to anyone.

 

They had restrained him but were trying to put the cuffs on, and he wouldn't budge so they tased... The other option was getting beaten with one of their sticks cause he sure as hell wasn't moving.

 

3+ cops couldn't put cuffs on a college student who was restrained face down on the ground? I'm sorry, but I'm a little skeptical.

[assassin_696]

So I've thought about it a lot more and actually completely changed my opinion:

 

 

 

Think about the 20 kids at Virginia Tech who died... What if that kid had pulled out a gun, or a knife? He deserved what he got, and I think the cops using over-aggressive force is okay in a situation like that, ESPECIALLY with all the shootings that are going on now. The cops shouldn't be responsible for what that student was capable of.

 

 

 

So anyone who voices an unorthodox opinion is assumed a terrorist or potential murderer?

 

 

 

The kid was a bit of a nut, granted, but he probably wasn't a murderer, and come to think of it, wouldn't there be some kind of security checks before you went into one of those things? I'm not sure how it works in America but a metal detector might not be too far-fetched.

[Hi9im8Here7]

Owned.

 

 

 

I don't see why the police needed to take him out in the first place. Sure he was being provocative and insulting but he was doing it to a politician who should have taken it in his stride and just answered the question. No need for that whole scene.

 

 

 

+1

 

 

 

When I watched it awhile ago it looks like Kerry was about to answer the question, but I guess the testosterone took over when it came to stifling "civil disobedience".

[Barihawk]

Defender has a point. The world is not getting better, it's only getting more convenient.

So in your mind, the fact that during the past century, advances in industry, medicine and agriculture has made it possible for our population to increase from 1.6 billion to 6.5 billion means life has gotten more "convenient"?

 

 

 

I don't feel entirely out of my depth when I claim that refering to "not dying, but growing up forming a family and procreating" as a "convenience" is a gross understatement.

 

 

 

That is true, but it was not brought up by Assassin nor Warri0r. However, we have only managed to do this in 1st tier nations. There are millions dying worldwide from malnutrition and disease.

 

 

 

Hence the convenience. It's easy to notice change when it's happening to you, but not to others.

[assassin_696]

Defender has a point. The world is not getting better, it's only getting more convenient.

So in your mind, the fact that during the past century, advances in industry, medicine and agriculture has made it possible for our population to increase from 1.6 billion to 6.5 billion means life has gotten more "convenient"?

 

 

 

I don't feel entirely out of my depth when I claim that refering to "not dying, but growing up forming a family and procreating" as a "convenience" is a gross understatement.

 

 

 

That is true, but it was not brought up by Assassin nor Warri0r. However, we have only managed to do this in 1st tier nations. There are millions dying worldwide from malnutrition and disease.

 

 

 

Hence the convenience. It's easy to notice change when it's happening to you, but not to others.

 

 

 

I pointed out that all the improvements which Defender dismissed off-hand. I never said these problems had gone from society, I pointed out that in the developed world to a large extent we're moving towards eradicating many of the problems of the past by a combination of the moving moral zeitgeist and advancing technology. Of course, LEDC's still lag behind but that's to be expected, and we're setting the bar for the future.

[Barihawk]

Developed world, yes. But is anything being done to help the developing world? No, because it's not convenient to us. All those issues are still rampant in the third world.

[warri0r45]

wow I'm very disappointed in the audience. They should have stood up to them and took em down. They can't tase everyone in the audience.

 

 

 

but no they just laugh at him as he's being tased. What a bunch of [wagon].

 

 

 

 

 

 

You think thats bad? We have people here laughing at a man who died from a headbut. Although it seems unlikely someone would die and especially from a armless man, the fact that they find it funny is insanity.

 

 

 

I remember when I was at my school... and the twin towers fell.. the black people in their laughed hard as the white people ran for their lives.

 

 

 

People can tell me all they want that this world is getting better.. but I say their just blind and always will be.

 

 

 

You're right, it was much better when those black people were our slaves and we were laughing at them.

 

 

 

So you'd rather world wars, disease pandemics, slavery, widescale ignorance, widescale discrimination, the heightened threat of nuclear armageddon, lower life expectancy, witch trials, crusades, rape and pillage tactics, arms races, eugenics and human experiments?

 

 

 

Now is your turn. Show me the light and lead my from my blindness.

 

 

 

You can never make a blind man see the light.. and I am to tired to debate right now.. but here is why you are blind, since you counted yourself as a blind man.

 

 

 

1. Rape: Amazing you put this one on this list. Okay everyone, unlock your windows, open your doors, men do not rape women anymore, the world is a better place.

 

 

 

2. Disease pandemics: Thank God we have a cure for aids..

 

 

 

3. Slavery: Are you joking? Not in America, but definatly around the world..

 

 

 

4 the heightened threat of nuclear armageddon: Yeah, we don't have that nowdays.. I will let North Korea know.

 

 

 

5. widescale ignorance, widescale discrimination: I shall let the Muslim world know they are no longer a threat.

 

 

 

6.lower life expectancy: Obesity in America, last I checked, is at 66% and increasing. The world is getting filled up with more man made chemicals than ever. We have strong mediciene, but it is shown that youths are getting sicker at younger ages.

 

 

 

7. crusades: I guess terrorists wasn't on a crusade when they kill our troops and bomb our towers. They did it for their religion, it is a Crusade to kill all Americans and Jews.

 

 

 

I could say more, but you would probably on attempt to refute it with more ignorance words with mixed in insults.

 

 

 

So I really don't bother with you much Warrior. Enjoy your blindness of this great world that is existing.. wow a world with no rape.. has the world really been this de-sensitized.

 

 

 

(1) Of course, it still happens. These days it's not only actually against the law and heavily punished, it's frequency is down. 1

 

 

 

(2) Yes defender, it was much better back when we had the plague and hundreds of millions died from smallpox, a disease now eradicated.

 

 

 

(3) Actually, I'll give you this one. 2

 

 

 

(4) Obviously you're not up to date with the latest news on NK, they are disarming for aid. That's besides the point considering it was 1953 where the doomsday clock was 2 minutes to midnight. As far as I'm aware it's 11:55 now.

 

 

 

(5) We are a more enlightened race on the whole. Take science for instance. Of course, ignorance still exists.

 

 

 

(6) And is life expectancy greater now than, say, 100 years ago? You have a point with the peripheral issues but that was beside the point I was making.

 

 

 

(7) Yes, we still have terrorists, a prolem that's hardly a modern phenomenon mind you. Casualties for the crusades roughly 1.5 million compared to the few thousand from muslim extremists in modern times. 3

 

 

 

It looks like I didn't add that little footnote. Of course, many of these things still happen. The point was many of these things have gotten better, or, at least, you could hardly say they've gotten worse.

 

 

 

Feel free to PM me with exactly why it is you think earth is going to hell in a handbasket, defender. I think you know what I mean.

[baron8000]

So I've thought about it a lot more and actually completely changed my opinion:

 

 

 

Think about the 20 kids at Virginia Tech who died... What if that kid had pulled out a gun, or a knife? He deserved what he got, and I think the cops using over-aggressive force is okay in a situation like that, ESPECIALLY with all the shootings that are going on now. The cops shouldn't be responsible for what that student was capable of.

 

 

 

So anyone who voices an unorthodox opinion is assumed a terrorist or potential murderer?

 

 

 

The kid was a bit of a nut, granted, but he probably wasn't a murderer, and come to think of it, wouldn't there be some kind of security checks before you went into one of those things? I'm not sure how it works in America but a metal detector might not be too far-fetched.

 

 

 

That view (MPC) would have more relevance had the police tazered him when he was actually in a position to physically pull a gun - from what I saw the guy was face down on the floor completely pinned but just wriggly enough to prevent the handcuffs being put on. There was no way that kid was able to pull a gun in that position and had plenty of opportunity to do so before he was restrained.

 

 

 

Anyone know whats going to happen to the police who did this? If anything?

[BlueTear]

That is true, but it was not brought up by Assassin nor Warri0r. However, we have only managed to do this in 1st tier nations.There are millions dying worldwide from malnutrition and disease.

 

 

 

Hence the convenience. It's easy to notice change when it's happening to you, but not to others.

So none of the scientific discoveries in regards to agriculture, industry and medicine made since, say, the black plague ravaged Europe has actually saved lives in a non-First World country?

[Barihawk]

No, because that costs money to us. We've solved hunger in this country, but go to sleep comforted by the fact that it's "better than it used to be" in other nations, when we have the power to stop it.

 

 

 

And PS:

 

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/18/studen ... index.html

 

 

 

Relevant to topic. Guy was just a publicity stunt.

[BlueTear]

No, because that costs money to us. We've solved hunger in this country, but go to sleep comforted by the fact that it's "better than it used to be" in other nations, when we have the power to stop it.

Normally, I'd dissect those statements a bit more thoroughly, but I can't be bothered.

 

 

 

Suffice to say "better than it used to be" is true. The world has, and continues, to improve. To get better. The fact that it does not fit the description of a perfect world does not take away from that fact, so you just conceded the point I was making: The world is in fact a better place than it once was. Defender, when making the following statement; "People can tell me all they want that this world is getting better.. but I say their just blind and always will be." was incorrect.

[Barihawk]

Our point still stands that only OUR world is getting better, not the entire world. There are entire nations out there (I can think of one neighboring country, can you?) where the medieval system of feudalism persists to this day.

 

 

 

Our point that it's inconsiderate for Americans, Brits, and other 1st world countries to say it's all getting better, when such archaic things are still occurring in the world.

 

 

 

Whether it happens any more or less frequently is irrelevant, it's still occurring. Saying anything to the contrary is just kidding yourself.

[The Observer]

HAha. He wouldn't of been tasered if he didn't shout his mouth off like a prat.

 

 

 

If they got out a gun and shot him, would that of worked? The taser was right where his heart was for crying out loud! It could have killed him!

[Defender2516]

Technology increases efficency and convience.

 

Knowledge increases intelligence.

 

But there is no known cure for the heart of man.

 

 

 

Hilter is a great example. In his time, he definatly had technology, and no dispute about intelligence, but with it, he used it to create slavery and mass murders of millions.

 

 

 

Advances in Technoloy and increased knowledge does not produce a better world, only people can do that.

 

 

 

What if you found a cure for aids, or a forumla to stop world hunger, but showed it to no one? It profits no one.

[Barihawk]

Technology increases efficency and convience.

 

Knowledge increases intelligence.

 

But there is no known cure for the heart of man.

 

 

 

Hilter is a great example. In his time, he definatly had technology, and no dispute about intelligence, but with it, he used it to create slavery and mass murders of millions.

 

 

 

Advances in Technoloy and increased knowledge does not produce a better world, only people can do that.

 

 

 

What if you found a cure for aids, or a forumla to stop world hunger, but showed it to no one? It profits no one.

 

 

 

To elaborate on your last sentence, what if we could do something about the ills of the world, but we charge money for it?

 

 

 

Yes, technology and knowlege have helped over the last 1000 years. But the human element is what corrupts both.

[warri0r45]

Technology increases efficency and convience.

 

Knowledge increases intelligence.

 

But there is no known cure for the heart of man.

 

 

 

Hilter is a great example. In his time, he definatly had technology, and no dispute about intelligence, but with it, he used it to create slavery and mass murders of millions.

 

 

 

Advances in Technoloy and increased knowledge does not produce a better world, only people can do that.

 

 

 

What if you found a cure for aids, or a forumla to stop world hunger, but showed it to no one? It profits no one.

 

 

 

To elaborate on your last sentence, what if we could do something about the ills of the world, but we charge money for it?

 

 

 

Yes, technology and knowlege have helped over the last 1000 years. But the human element is what corrupts both.

 

 

 

You know what, you're absolutely right. The human element of corruption, greed, etc has always been, just like many of the worlds problems have always been. Like BlueTear said, that's far from being able to say it's getting worse, which I argue even morality towards our fellow man is not. Consider world wars, crusades and the medieval dark ages where everyone was divided into thier camps of us vs. them. Now consider today with an organisation such as the UN, wide scale trade and diplomacy (yet still with probems such as the middle east and various dictatorships dotted here and there) and a huge input of aid to the poor both from the countries of the world and the people from those countries via charity.

[Barihawk]

You do realize that unless they have troops accompanying relief efforts, all money and food goes into the hands of warlords and dictators, who then sell the relief food to their people?

 

 

 

Almost 15% of all relief supplies sent to Africa actually make it into the hands of the people. I was priveleged to spend 12 hours packing a shipping crate of medical supplies to go to Ghana a few years back. 12 exhausting hours of work, and they told us the statistic above. It really puts it into perspective how little actually gets put to use.

 

 

 

And the UN is garbage. All the money they "donate" goes to member nations who are then charged to use the money to accomplish the goal of the project. How cheaply and at what profit is up to them *cough*France*cough*. Not to mention, giving terrorists strategic information in order to keep member nations in control (i.e. bluehelmets giving Lebonese and Palistinian forces Israeli troop information and coordinates last year that killed thousands of Israeli soldiers in rocket attacks.)

 

 

 

The UN is bound to the same human corruption as we are.

[assassin_696]

Your optimism knows no bounds.

 

 

 

Again, you're nitpicking Bari, warri0r was pointing out that today there are global charities and relief efforts trying to make the situation better. The politics and other complications make this a massive task, but the intention is there, whereas 500 years ago it wasn't. That's the point, not the actual effectiveness.

[BlueTear]

Our point still stands that only OUR world is getting better, not the entire world. There are entire nations out there (I can think of one neighboring country, can you?) where the medieval system of feudalism persists to this day.

Oh please. Just admit you painted yourself into a corner rather than come up with some half-assed excuse that when you said "world", you only meant our corner of our "planet". The life of the vast majority of the billions of humans that live on this planet are better of today than they were a century ago. In fact, 5.5 billion of these people, which is well over 50% of the humans alive today, would not be alive were it not for the advances of human civilization over the past century.

 

 

 

Defender can give all the fancy speeches on morality he likes, there's 5 500 000 000 reasons why the world is a better place.

[warren211]

Not sure what to think of this. On one hand, he was a kind of a motormouth. He had 3 questions and was the kind of guy who would keep accusing you without letting you respond.

 

 

 

"Jimmy, did you take the cookie from the jar?"

 

"No mommy! I-"

 

"ANSWER THE QUESTION!"

 

"Mom I-"

 

"How could you do this Jimmy? I told you not to, and you styill disobeyed me."

 

"Mom, I didn't-"

 

"Jimmy, lying is for evil people. don't lie. Why did you take it???? Jimmy, wait till your father gets home!"

 

"Mommy I didn't-"

 

"No more questions! No dinner for you!"

 

 

 

 

 

He wouldn't shut up, and other people didnt have a chance to ask questions. Then when asked to leave, he refuses. If you ask me, an arrest is enough there. Did he deserve a taser?

[Barihawk]

Your optimism knows no bounds.

 

 

 

Again, you're nitpicking Bari, warri0r was pointing out that today there are global charities and relief efforts trying to make the situation better. The politics and other complications make this a massive task, but the intention is there, whereas 500 years ago it wasn't. That's the point, not the actual effectiveness.

 

 

 

I am sure the dirt farmers in Africa go to sleep soundly knowing that you are "trying."

 

 

 

And my nitpicking is a direct result of Warri0r's nitpicking in the first place. Poverty, famine, pestilence, rape, war...it all continues regardless of how many people it claims in comparison to the past.

 

 

 

Consider Slobodan Milosovich's crusade against the Serbs in Yugoslavia. He killed hundreds of thousands. Saddam killed over a hundred thousand Kurds. Millions of babies are killed at birth in China. This year alone, more than 80,000 people have died from Islamic jihads. Last night alone in America (assuming an 8 hour period), 2000 women were raped, 1000 people were shot or stabbed, 200 people died from starvation, more than 10,000 continue to feed drug addictions that make them virtual slaves to the people who give them the drugs...

 

 

 

The world is just as evil as it was 500 years ago. We may find cures for diseases and solve problems, but the human cruelty just creates more ills for society. If you want to call me pessimistic, call me a realist instead. Not thinking about the problem does not make the problem go away.

 

 

 

Without results, the dirt farmer is still starving while your relief efforts buy bullets used to kill the dirt farmer.

 

 

 

And to Bluetear: The majority of the population boom is occuring in developed nations. There are many many areas of the world with negative population increase, and no emigration. And please keep this civil, there's no need for profanity.

 

 

 

EDIT: It's worth noting I have a degree in History. And what do historians do? We analyze the past and compare it to the present in order to address the future.

 

 

 

EDIT2: I figure a source is going to be desired, so try the 2007 World Almanac, which features crime reports from a great number of nations. The other numbers are gotten from a friend in the D.O.D.

[warri0r45]

Your optimism knows no bounds.

 

 

 

Again, you're nitpicking Bari, warri0r was pointing out that today there are global charities and relief efforts trying to make the situation better. The politics and other complications make this a massive task, but the intention is there, whereas 500 years ago it wasn't. That's the point, not the actual effectiveness.

 

 

 

I am sure the dirt farmers in Africa go to sleep soundly knowing that you are "trying."

 

 

 

And my nitpicking is a direct result of Warri0r's nitpicking in the first place. Poverty, famine, pestilence, rape, war...it all continues regardless of how many people it claims in comparison to the past.

 

 

 

Consider Slobodan Milosovich's crusade against the Serbs in Yugoslavia. He killed hundreds of thousands. Saddam killed over a hundred thousand Kurds. Millions of babies are killed at birth in China. This year alone, more than 80,000 people have died from Islamic jihads. Last night alone in America (assuming an 8 hour period), 2000 women were raped, 1000 people were shot or stabbed, 200 people died from starvation, more than 10,000 continue to feed drug addictions that make them virtual slaves to the people who give them the drugs...

 

 

 

The world is just as evil as it was 500 years ago. We may find cures for diseases and solve problems, but the human cruelty just creates more ills for society. If you want to call me pessimistic, call me a realist instead. Not thinking about the problem does not make the problem go away.

 

 

 

Without results, the dirt farmer is still starving while your relief efforts buy bullets used to kill the dirt farmer.

 

 

 

And to Bluetear: The majority of the population boom is occuring in developed nations. There are many many areas of the world with negative population increase, and no emigration. And please keep this civil, there's no need for profanity.

 

 

 

EDIT: It's worth noting I have a degree in History. And what do historians do? We analyze the past and compare it to the present in order to address the future.

 

 

 

EDIT2: I figure a source is going to be desired, so try the 2007 World Almanac, which features crime reports from a great number of nations. The other numbers are gotten from a friend in the D.O.D.

 

 

 

I could put some research together for an argument but you likely know what you're talking about so I'll take it above my opinion. Again, I never said all of the things I listed in my first post were all non existant today, I just speculated they were worse in the past and never claimed the world today to be perfect. I realise that much at least. How was I being nitpicky by the way?

 

 

 

Edit: Perhaps I can get your educated views on the matter (if you'd like to give it a go). The question is, based on historical evidence, do you think the world has gotten worse is terms of 1) living conditions and 2) general morality?

 

 

 

Edit 2: I realise asking about whether morality has gotten better is prone to bias so let me pose some general morals which I think most can agree on: killing is bad, altruism is good, the golden rule is good and a sense of fairness is good. There we go.

[Barihawk]

I am actually writing a 25 page paper on Urban history, which is a narrow vision of this subject for one of my grad classes. I will be happy to post it in December for you to read. I might post some snippets over the next two months via pm if you are interested as I do the research.

 

 

 

Anyways, to first paragraph. Ok, I will conceed that some of the items on that list have been reduced. However, several items still occur at relative frequencies, if not even unchanged in some areas of the world. There's my compromise.

 

 

 

I realise asking about whether morality has gotten better is prone to bias so let me pose some general morals which I think most can agree on: killing is bad, altruism is good, the golden rule is good and a sense of fairness is good. There we go.

 

 

 

Those are all good morals, and they've been around for thousands of years. However, none of them really hold true when it comes down to it. The latter three I believe just about everyone is guilty of on some level. The first not so much, but it still happens with alarming frequency.