All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[WestPhillyPunisher]

the tragedy for those communities struck by the tornadoes illustrates the grave moral soundness of the Build Back Better Act and the recently passed American Infrastructure Act. I've written to Chuck Schumer that he should fast track voting on the Build Back Better bill as well as the Voting Rights Act before the end of the year. Force a carve-around of the filibuster. It's way beyond time to act with a sense of urgency. Those tornadoes could have touched down anywhere. Those communities in particular need immediate help literally rebuilding, all the things that are in the infrastructure bill. The BBB Act will address the human services side of the equation. This is serious. If the Dems are serious about regaining some momentum for 2022, then passing legislation that helps out all Americans (including "red staters"), and then hopefully never shutting up about the party who passed this, that's highly important.

Agreed. Between the storms that hit Kentucky on Friday and the remnants of Hurricane Ida that slammed the northeast with severe flooding back in September, the need of that infrastructure bill becomes even more important, especially as climate change makes bad weather even worse.

[Mister Mets]

I do think it is useful to respond to arguments being made, without getting agitated or taking it personally.

There are people reading the discussion who might not be familiar with some of the counterarguments. Whether he is trolling or not, there are people out there who believe what he claims to believe.

He gets to a pernicious argument that I saw on a billboard, something like "You don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to recognize something's wrong." We need to be able to respond to that argument.

I will admit that I do seem some similarities between his approach and how some of the left-wingers here respond to news items as proof that all their predictions are real.

Sounds like sarcasm and a wink from here. The preposterousness of such "landslides" suggests as much. But let's say you read is generous to his intent - I am not following what you mean by bad argument. Unsound reasoning? or Poor intentions?

I don't see the extremes as poor tactic so much as a divisive one that doesn't leave any center ground. It is more a scorched earth concept that seeks to deny the other moderation. The left has somehow come to believe that people will be forced to come to their side out of despair.

A progressive may be mistaken and believe that their candidates can win landslides by being so obviously right.

That said, the argument is more fatalistic, about how things will be bad when Democrats do not win landslides. He is pretty clear that he believes landslides are necessary to offset the work by corrupt conservatives "Trump loyalists they elect to office are fixing the process so it will take absolute Democratic landslides in every election to keep our Democracy intact."

I do believe you've made obnoxious and incorrect claims about someone else's character. You should do the right thing and apologize.

[babyblob]

When I was in high school I had a great friend Tony. We stayed in touch for many years after I quit school and we still talk a couple times a year. We drifted apart as people do in life. He had an older brother Phil. Phil always treated me as family. In Phil's house he had what he called his Pine Room. it was a room with Pine Panel walls and it was where the 3 of us would go to relax and their father often joined us. We would listen to music sip some drinks even though Tony and I were not 21 and just talk and enjoy the night. Sadly I found out about an hour ago that Phil had been killed in the Tornados that hit Kentucky. It is very upsetting.

I spent the last few days upset that my home state had suffered such a tragedy. Not I am more then upset. I have known him for 24 years, I have been a guest in his home and was there for the birth of his two daughters, and even though we didnt talk as often as we used to I very much feel his loss.

[Kirby101]

I am sorry to hear blob, that is truly sad.

[Tami]

When I was in high school I had a great friend Tony. We stayed in touch for many years after I quit school and we still talk a couple times a year. We drifted apart as people do in life. He had an older brother Phil. Phil always treated me as family. In Phil's house he had what he called his Pine Room. it was a room with Pine Panel walls and it was where the 3 of us would go to relax and their father often joined us. We would listen to music sip some drinks even though Tony and I were not 21 and just talk and enjoy the night. Sadly I found out about an hour ago that Phil had been killed in the Tornados that hit Kentucky. It is very upsetting.

I spent the last few days upset that my home state had suffered such a tragedy. Not I am more then upset. I have known him for 24 years, I have been a guest in his home and was there for the birth of his two daughters, and even though we didnt talk as often as we used to I very much feel his loss.

Oh man, that's ...... I'm so sorry that you lost a friend ..... I'm so sorry that anyone had to go through the mess and chaos of the tornadoes.

[babyblob]

I am sorry to hear blob, that is truly sad.

Oh man, that's ...... I'm so sorry that you lost a friend ..... I'm so sorry that anyone had to go through the mess and chaos of the tornadoes.

Thank you both. Just kind of came out of no where. He and his family have been a big part of my life for a long time. They were some of the only people to stand by me when I went to prison. Im trying to find ways to distract myself and not stay too focused on this. But I am hurting tonight.

And I am not alone. There are so many people that are hurting bad. Like there world ended and for them it really did. Makes us really take stock about the people in our lives and how lucky we are right now.

[Mister Mets]

A better political strategy? Maybe dont bury their head in the sand all the time. GOP doesnt like something it is every where, Twitter, Facebook, The news every where. The Dems dont like something one or two tweets then nothing.

When Lauren Boebert made her joke there were a couple statements "Oh that was a racist joke and she should be removed from committees." But man tell it like it is. It wasnt just a racist joke, she made the joke because she is racist and the people there laughed because they are racist. But they are too scared to say that because they dont want to offend anyone.

The GOP claims to be on the side of law and order they say it all the time. Call them out on that shit! They support the man who told a mob to attack the capital, call those that raided the capital heroes and are now activity trying to cover it up and hide the truth. Whe a OP member talks about how important protecting our democracy is and how much they support law and order then a Dem law maker needs to go on record and say "Really? You voted against the Jan 6th commission so clearly you are lying!"

The GOP claims to love democracy and what it stands for yet pass voter restriction laws to keep people from voting. Say it like it is. They are passing these laws because they do not want POC to vote because they are scared of how they will vote. So they are making it as hard as possible for them to cast their votes using the BS excuse of security to pass them.

They let the GOP blame Biden for Covid problems right now when Trump was the one who mishandled and lied about the problem for so long and they are the party of spreading misinformation and lies. Tell it like it is. Why is your mother dead from Coivd? Because we have a large amount of people fighting and spreading lies about vaccines, masks and who actively do what they can to kill people. Only the GOP can have their president push through the vaccine take credit for that and then do everything they can to keep people from taking it and then blame Biden and the Dems.

I was told speaking out and calling them out like this is useless because the nut jobs wont care. You know what is worse then useless? You know what is dangerous? Not calling people out on their shit. For some reason too many people in power are acting like the worst case scenario will not happen when it has been happening almost on a weekly basis for years.

Call them out on the bullshit. but they are so scared of offending people, so scared of being seen just as bad that they do not. And it is beyond maddening.

To make sure that we're not arguing past one another, one reason that I strive to define the high road is my concern that advocating for a departure from the high road is no longer caring about facts, and doing away with the pretense of caring about it. I suspect that would be a bad strategy politically, but perhaps it would work, as long as Democrats can get enough people to believe they're on their side.

As long as someone has the facts on their side, they've got the high road. But this means they should be careful to avoid being on the wrong side of an issue, and being the douchebag attacking people who are right.

Going further with criticism of Boebert can backfire. It elevates a congressional backbencher, seems dishonest to anyone with a basic understanding of Congress, and can get into murky territory, especially when seen through the prism of less-enlightened swing voters.

Saying that Trump called on people to attack the capitol only works when you have enough people believing you. I don't think that's the case. I'm unaware of any time Trump told anyone on January 6 to break into the capitol. I understand the argument that he should have done more or that he riled up his supporters but it can be easy to come across as the left-wing version of Xheight if you're arguing about what people secretly believe, or what they hint through dog whistles, rather than what was actually said.

Democrats seem to do plenty of yelling about voter restrictions. It can be effective for turnout, but it may not be the smartest campaign topic because it seems a bit self-serving, and it invites discussion of areas related to voting where Republicans have popular positions (the majority of Americans are in favor of requiring Photo ID at the polling place.)

There are serious questions about Covid, with the conflict between liberty and mass safety, as well as the questions of how much or how little evidence is necessary for particular statewide mandates. The mainstream Republican position is that vaccination is good, but that we don't need it to be mandated, and that this means we don't need earlier restrictions. This pushes Democrats to either argue that most Republicans are secretly opposed to vaccination, or to take much stronger positions, which may not be popular with voters (Requiring the firing of people who do not want to get vaccinated can contribute to supply chain problems, and people may not think mask mandates are necessary when the vaccine makes Covid significantly less transmissible and less dangerous.)

Abandoning the high road means that you're going to be wrong. A lot. Those who have abandoned the high road claim that ambiguous situations are certain, go with the least generous interpretations of their opponents' motives, and painting everyone with too broad a stroke.

An impression I have in politics is that when people adopt a strategy of the other side, what they really end up doing is becoming a caricature of that. We can see that in Trump, who has become a caricature of the overpromising politician.

When I was in high school I had a great friend Tony. We stayed in touch for many years after I quit school and we still talk a couple times a year. We drifted apart as people do in life. He had an older brother Phil. Phil always treated me as family. In Phil's house he had what he called his Pine Room. it was a room with Pine Panel walls and it was where the 3 of us would go to relax and their father often joined us. We would listen to music sip some drinks even though Tony and I were not 21 and just talk and enjoy the night. Sadly I found out about an hour ago that Phil had been killed in the Tornados that hit Kentucky. It is very upsetting.

I spent the last few days upset that my home state had suffered such a tragedy. Not I am more then upset. I have known him for 24 years, I have been a guest in his home and was there for the birth of his two daughters, and even though we didnt talk as often as we used to I very much feel his loss.

Very sorry to read this. My condolences to you and to his family.

[babyblob]

To make sure that we're not arguing past one another, one reason that I strive to define the high road is my concern that advocating for a departure from the high road is no longer caring about facts, and doing away with the pretense of caring about it. I suspect that would be a bad strategy politically, but perhaps it would work, as long as Democrats can get enough people to believe they're on their side.

As long as someone has the facts on their side, they've got the high road. But this means they should be careful to avoid being on the wrong side of an issue, and being the douchebag attacking people who are right.

Going further with criticism of Boebert can backfire. It elevates a congressional backbencher, seems dishonest to anyone with a basic understanding of Congress, and can get into murky territory, especially when seen through the prism of less-enlightened swing voters.

Saying that Trump called on people to attack the capitol only works when you have enough people believing you. I don't think that's the case. I'm unaware of any time Trump told anyone on January 6 to break into the capitol. I understand the argument that he should have done more or that he riled up his supporters but it can be easy to come across as the left-wing version of Xheight if you're arguing about what people secretly believe, or what they hint through dog whistles, rather than what was actually said.

Democrats seem to do plenty of yelling about voter restrictions. It can be effective for turnout, but it may not be the smartest campaign topic because it seems a bit self-serving, and it invites discussion of areas related to voting where Republicans have popular positions (the majority of Americans are in favor of requiring Photo ID at the polling place.)

There are serious questions about Covid, with the conflict between liberty and mass safety, as well as the questions of how much or how little evidence is necessary for particular statewide mandates. The mainstream Republican position is that vaccination is good, but that we don't need it to be mandated, and that this means we don't need earlier restrictions. This pushes Democrats to either argue that most Republicans are secretly opposed to vaccination, or to take much stronger positions, which may not be popular with voters (Requiring the firing of people who do not want to get vaccinated can contribute to supply chain problems, and people may not think mask mandates are necessary when the vaccine makes Covid significantly less transmissible and less dangerous.)

Abandoning the high road means that you're going to be wrong. A lot. Those who have abandoned the high road claim that ambiguous situations are certain, go with the least generous interpretations of their opponents' motives, and painting everyone with too broad a stroke.

An impression I have in politics is that when people adopt a strategy of the other side, what they really end up doing is becoming a caricature of that. We can see that in Trump, who has become a caricature of the overpromising politician.


Very sorry to read this. My condolences to you and to his family.

I understand people think that taking the low road means lying or portraying false facts etc.. To me it just means stop being so damn polite. A person can tell how they feel and what needs to be said with out being so worried about upsetting someone. So when I say they need to stop taking the high road I dont mean lie and cheat. I just mean start being more aggressive, stop being worried about hurting people's feelings.

Thank you for your thoughts. This place has always been a big help to me and my mental health. The people here are great. And I am sure I will be here a lot more in the next few days. Thanks to everyone here!

[Xheight]

]
He gets to a pernicious argument that I saw on a billboard, something like "You don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to recognize something's wrong." We need to be able to respond to that argument.

I will admit that I do seem some similarities between his approach and how some of the left-wingers here respond to news items as proof that all their predictions are real.

Why characterize such an argument as pernicious yet not explain its fault? I don't begrudge Democrats their intuitions as sure as I would not have them begrudge mine. Essentially both are probably skeptical of claims not coming from sources they have confidence in.

A progressive may be mistaken and believe that their candidates can win landslides by being so obviously right.
That said, the argument is more fatalistic, about how things will be bad when Democrats do not win landslides. He is pretty clear that he believes landslides are necessary to offset the work by corrupt conservatives "Trump loyalists they elect to office are fixing the process so it will take absolute Democratic landslides in every election to keep our Democracy intact."

I do believe you've made obnoxious and incorrect claims about someone else's character. You should do the right thing and apologize.

Like I said you are being perhaps generous and literal for someone else who hasn't clarified. Mistaken perhaps but based on presumption. That speaks to character - righteousness. Which hardly fits with the skepticism that I would otherwise grant. I don't see how I would owe anyone an apology for their inconsistency and flagrant bias. I have my bias too and that includes the character of some left-wingers. As to fixing the process, I have already expressed that it has already been achieved by the Democratic party and holding on to it is the real debate before us.

[Username taken]

I understand people think that taking the low road means lying or portraying false facts etc.. To me it just means stop being so damn polite. A person can tell how they feel and what needs to be said with out being so worried about upsetting someone. So when I say they need to stop taking the high road I dont mean lie and cheat. I just mean start being more aggressive, stop being worried about hurting people's feelings.

Thank you for your thoughts. This place has always been a big help to me and my mental health. The people here are great. And I am sure I will be here a lot more in the next few days. Thanks to everyone here!

The Democrats need to be more aggressive and they need to state the facts are they are- forcefully.

For example, the high inflation rate is because of the rapidly growing economy. Yes, contrary to the nonsense being written all around, the US economy is actually starting to recover rapidly and that sort of rapid growth leads to inflation. The Biden boom is real but because so much of the mainstream media is still trying to "both sides" the issue, their reporting is absolute crap. And as a minority, minority unemployment is way, way down (compared to the peak of the pandemic) these things need to be said more. Trump for example used social media very effectively.

The covid crisis wasn't something that Biden started and a lot of effort being made at the Federal level is being frustrated. These are things that need to be said and repeated. Trump was able to use social media so effectively because 1). He's the President and his words carry weight 2) He knows people don't really have the time to research a lot of bullshit claims 3) Perception is reality. Now, I'm not saying that Biden and the democrats need to bullshit people but there is a need to get the message out there. Right now, Biden's approval rating regarding the handling of the pandemic is very low which is totally and completely insane!

The increased gerrymandering and voting rights restrictions are designed specifically to reduce minority voter turnout (it's not lost on the GOP that the last Presidential elections were swayed heavily by the minority turnout in certain states), not enough is being made by the Democrats at the center about this. Granted, Biden's administration has recently countered some of these lately, not enough is being said about this. Particularly how it could ruin the US Democracy in years to come.

[babyblob]

The Democrats need to be more aggressive and they need to state the facts are they are- forcefully.

For example, the high inflation rate is because of the rapidly growing economy. Yes, contrary to the nonsense being written all around, the US economy is actually starting to recover rapidly and that sort of rapid growth leads to inflation. The Biden boom is real but because so much of the mainstream media is still trying to "both sides" the issue, their reporting is absolute crap. And as a minority, minority unemployment is way, way down (compared to the peak of the pandemic) these things need to be said more. Trump for example used social media very effectively.

The covid crisis wasn't something that Biden started and a lot of effort being made at the Federal level is being frustrated. These are things that need to be said and repeated. Trump was able to use social media so effectively because 1). He's the President and his words carry weight 2) He knows people don't really have the time to research a lot of bullshit claims 3) Perception is reality. Now, I'm not saying that Biden and the democrats need to bullshit people but there is a need to get the message out there. Right now, Biden's approval rating regarding the handling of the pandemic is very low which is totally and completely insane!

The increased gerrymandering and voting rights restrictions are designed specifically to reduce minority voter turnout (it's not lost on the GOP that the last Presidential elections were swayed heavily by the minority turnout in certain states), not enough is being made by the Democrats at the center about this. Granted, Biden's administration has recently countered some of these lately, not enough is being said about this. Particularly how it could ruin the US Democracy in years to come.

This! You put it better then I did. Thank you

[Xheight]

To make sure that we're not arguing past one another, one reason that I strive to define the high road is my concern that advocating for a departure from the high road is no longer caring about facts, and doing away with the pretense of caring about it. I suspect that would be a bad strategy politically, but perhaps it would work, as long as Democrats can get enough people to believe they're on their side.

As long as someone has the facts on their side, they've got the high road. But this means they should be careful to avoid being on the wrong side of an issue, and being the douchebag attacking people who are right.

As a life strategy perhaps I would agree but that is to conflate politics with life and this is the departure point from science and morality just as "what is" from "what should be" are two different things.

Issues don't have a right or wrong - sorry only a place in time in politics. Society can work on any number of principles so it isn't about some Kantian world anymore where that is true.

Berlin criticised the positivist view of the sciences as the paradigmatic form of knowledge, which the humanities should measure themselves by and seek to emulate. He argued that the humanities differed fundamentally from the sciences both in the nature of their subject matter (as Vico and Dilthey had maintained), and in the sort of knowledge that they sought (as Rickert insisted). As a result, different methods, standards and goals were appropriate to each.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/b...twNatuHumaScie

[Xheight]

The Democrats need to be more aggressive and they need to state the facts are they are- forcefully.

For example, the high inflation rate is because of the rapidly growing economy. Yes, contrary to the nonsense being written all around, the US economy is actually starting to recover rapidly and that sort of rapid growth leads to inflation. The Biden boom is real but because so much of the mainstream media is still trying to "both sides" the issue, their reporting is absolute crap. And as a minority, minority unemployment is way, way down (compared to the peak of the pandemic) these things need to be said more. Trump for example used social media very effectively.

The covid crisis wasn't something that Biden started and a lot of effort being made at the Federal level is being frustrated. These are things that need to be said and repeated. Trump was able to use social media so effectively because 1). He's the President and his words carry weight 2) He knows people don't really have the time to research a lot of bullshit claims 3) Perception is reality. Now, I'm not saying that Biden and the democrats need to bullshit people but there is a need to get the message out there. Right now, Biden's approval rating regarding the handling of the pandemic is very low which is totally and completely insane!

The increased gerrymandering and voting rights restrictions are designed specifically to reduce minority voter turnout (it's not lost on the GOP that the last Presidential elections were swayed heavily by the minority turnout in certain states), not enough is being made by the Democrats at the center about this. Granted, Biden's administration has recently countered some of these lately, not enough is being said about this. Particularly how it could ruin the US Democracy in years to come.

Were it something empirical like science but it is not - sorry but a rapidly growing distorted economy creates inflation where wages and labor don't match up with the economy. Calling it Biden's boom is like call today's weather Monday's weather but Monday doesn't get the credit for it.

Speaking of occurrences that have a life outside of what we would like to control but can't really that would be Covid and again blame is is more about political gain than the select reality that feeds the claims of control. The blame game is just coming around to those that claim to have control, yelling more that you have control isn't exactly control more like being a control freak.

Minority turnout is and was crucial to the DNC selected candidate because that is the lever they can control in their machine through old and new mechanisms (much to Bernie's miscalculation) and pretending it is really about equity is nonsense rolled up in the ball of nonsense that voting in the USA is an majority population exercise to begin with. A fraction of the population actually votes.

[Username taken]

Were it something empirical like science but it is not - sorry but a rapidly growing distorted economy creates inflation where wages and labor don't match up with the economy. Calling it Biden's boom is like call today's weather Monday's weather but Monday doesn't get the credit for it.

Speaking of occurrences that have a life outside of what we would like to control but can't really that would be Covid and again blame is is more about political gain than the select reality that feeds the claims of control. The blame game is just coming around to those that claim to have control, yelling more that you have control isn't exactly control more like being a control freak.

Minority turnout is and was crucial to the DNC selected candidate because that is the lever they can control in their machine through old and new mechanisms (much to Bernie's miscalculation) and pretending it is really about equity is nonsense rolled up in the ball of nonsense that voting in the USA is an majority population exercise to begin with. A fraction of the population actually votes.

I don't agree with anything here that you've said.

And I stand by my points.

[Mister Mets]

I understand people think that taking the low road means lying or portraying false facts etc.. To me it just means stop being so damn polite. A person can tell how they feel and what needs to be said with out being so worried about upsetting someone. So when I say they need to stop taking the high road I dont mean lie and cheat. I just mean start being more aggressive, stop being worried about hurting people's feelings.

Thank you for your thoughts. This place has always been a big help to me and my mental health. The people here are great. And I am sure I will be here a lot more in the next few days. Thanks to everyone here!

It seems likely to me that if someone gets more aggressive and less concerned about others' feelings, they're much more likely to be wrong on the facts. They're more likely to make mistakes, to assume things that aren't true, to have an exaggerated sense of probability, to have the least generous interpretation of things, etc.

Why characterize such an argument as pernicious yet not explain its fault? I don't begrudge Democrats their intuitions as sure as I would not have them begrudge mine. Essentially both are probably skeptical of claims not coming from sources they have confidence in.



Like I said you are being perhaps generous and literal for someone else who hasn't clarified. Mistaken perhaps but based on presumption. That speaks to character - righteousness. Which hardly fits with the skepticism that I would otherwise grant. I don't see how I would owe anyone an apology for their inconsistency and flagrant bias. I have my bias too and that includes the character of some left-wingers. As to fixing the process, I have already expressed that it has already been achieved by the Democratic party and holding on to it is the real debate before us.

The reason "You don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to recognize something's wrong." is pernicious is that it's not dependent on facts.

People can be mistaken, and can have a wrong impression about reality, due to sampling error or whatever. This often happens when people are shocked at voting results, without considering how little they interact with the other side.

Someone who lives in a college town and is shocked that the local Republican congressman won reelection despite everyone in town hating him is encouraged to be conspiratorial because that fits their intuition, when a basic look at demographics would show that the college town is a small percentage of a largely rural congressional district.

When intuitions appear to be incorrect we should learn more. A small level of skepticism is healthy, but the guy calling a voter information service to complain about a congressional candidate's connection to Queen Elizabeth and the lizard people is not healthy.

Meanwhile, if someone didn't advocate for stealing elections, it would be wrong and obnoxious to suggest they did. If that's the case, you should apologize.

The Democrats need to be more aggressive and they need to state the facts are they are- forcefully.

For example, the high inflation rate is because of the rapidly growing economy. Yes, contrary to the nonsense being written all around, the US economy is actually starting to recover rapidly and that sort of rapid growth leads to inflation. The Biden boom is real but because so much of the mainstream media is still trying to "both sides" the issue, their reporting is absolute crap. And as a minority, minority unemployment is way, way down (compared to the peak of the pandemic) these things need to be said more. Trump for example used social media very effectively.

The covid crisis wasn't something that Biden started and a lot of effort being made at the Federal level is being frustrated. These are things that need to be said and repeated. Trump was able to use social media so effectively because 1). He's the President and his words carry weight 2) He knows people don't really have the time to research a lot of bullshit claims 3) Perception is reality. Now, I'm not saying that Biden and the democrats need to bullshit people but there is a need to get the message out there. Right now, Biden's approval rating regarding the handling of the pandemic is very low which is totally and completely insane!

The increased gerrymandering and voting rights restrictions are designed specifically to reduce minority voter turnout (it's not lost on the GOP that the last Presidential elections were swayed heavily by the minority turnout in certain states), not enough is being made by the Democrats at the center about this. Granted, Biden's administration has recently countered some of these lately, not enough is being said about this. Particularly how it could ruin the US Democracy in years to come.

There's room for legitimate disagreement about the causes and effects of inflation (to say nothing of the incorrectness of early predictions) or the Biden administration's handling of Covid. An aggressive and forceful defense might not address concerns about this.

I've written about gerrymandering in the past, and will link to a general post on past views for anyone interested.

https://community.cbr.com/showthread...=1#post5212566

But with the discussion, there are two main questions where you're going to get into some debate. 1) How significant is it? For example, how many congressional seats did Republicans hold after 2014 that they wouldn't have if districts were sorted randomly?

2) As the main solution to gerrymandering is to have some kind of independent body redraw boundaries, and so how do we select the independent commission and how do we make sure they do their job? What standards should they use to determine districts? How would we determine that this isn't a backdoor for partisans to gerrymander with a veneer of respectability?

As a life strategy perhaps I would agree but that is to conflate politics with life and this is the departure point from science and morality just as "what is" from "what should be" are two different things.

Issues don't have a right or wrong - sorry only a place in time in politics. Society can work on any number of principles so it isn't about some Kantian world anymore where that is true.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/b...twNatuHumaScie

There are many things that are uncertain, but there are things we've learned. The trick is to correctly identify the different categories.

For example, there are legitimate arguments about the appropriate uses of lead, but it is settled that lead poisoning is a bad thing.