Posted by:
amazondoc
at Sun Jan 31 11:20:51 2010 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by amazondoc ]
>>For a person who supposedly has no opinion on the matter I think it's strange that your critiques have been disproportionally directed towards the side that is against S373.
My critiques are "directed towards the side that is against S373" because everyone here is against it. If I were on a pro-S373 site, I would direct my critiques against the ban instead. I find that exploring the nooks and crannies of an issue with people of differing perspectives -- playing devil's advocate, more or less -- is a great way to really get a feel for the strengths and weaknesses on both sides of that issue. If you'll point me towards a pro-ban site, I'll be happy to take them on next. 
Thanks very much for that CBO estimate. I would tend to believe the CBO much more than USARK, since of course USARK has a vested interest in the numbers while CBO doesn't. CBO is depended upon to make objective cost estimates on incredibly important legislation every day.
And yes, of course this is an opinion site. But remember, every time you voice an opinion on the internet you are heard by people you might not even know about. Everyone that speaks out on one side or the other of an issue reflects on the issue itself. They may reflect well or poorly on that issue, depending on the tone and content of their comments -- and that helps to form readers' impressions about that issue. I think calm, rational people such as yourself reflect well on the anti-ban argument. Some others that have commented here, not so much....
-----
----
0.1 Peruvian rainbow boa (Amaru)
0.3 Honduran milksnakes (Chicchan, Chanir, Hari)
2.6 corns (Cetto, Tolosa, TBA)
1,000,000.1,000,000 other critters
[ Hide Replies ]
|
RE: You have 48 responses to this thread - amazondoc, Sun Jan 31 11:20:51 2010