Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Reckless move: The NY Times publishes Darren Wilson’s address (Reckless? No on Purpose? You bet)
Fox News.com ^ | November 26, 2014 | Howard Kurtz

Posted on 11/26/2014 6:39:47 PM PST by Kaslin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 last
To: Gefn

The New York Slimes editor? You’re joking aren’t you? Any conservative newspaper would have, but not the slimes


41 posted on 11/27/2014 4:02:53 AM PST by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

You are right, I stopped reading the Times about 20 years ago for that reason.


42 posted on 11/27/2014 4:47:29 AM PST by Gefn (Yes Virginia, I still believe in Santa Claus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sagar

“And this isn’t an appeal to emotions?”

See what I mean? You think that responsibility and decency are emotions. That’s bizarre. Responsibility and decency are products of reason because they require the use of reason, restraint, self-control and require planning and accountability. A person driven by emotions - like yourself- is much less likely to possess these things than a rational person. You are so far into the emotional life that you can’t even see this.

“Publishing your country’s military secrets is treason,”

Not necessarily - because that would require the intent to aid an enemy. That’s why no one is tried for treason here.

“so I would say it is “wrong”. Publishing a cop’s address is NOT treason or any sort of crime. You may not like it, but that does not make it a crime.”

Not a crime, just a reckless, stupid, wrongful action because it puts a family at risk unnecessarily. My analogy holds. My view is consistent. I am using logic while you are driven purely by emotions.

“Again, full of emotion appeals.”

Nope. Not a single one. Everything I said is purely rational. I made no emotional appeal at all. Are you honestly going to say this rational truth is an emotional appeal: “Just because someone has the ability to do a thing doesn’t mean he should.”

That is a point of logic. Someone has to use forethought and examine actions for potential moral issues. That is all about reason and not at all about emotions. Apparently your part of the poorly educated mass of emotion driven people who actually think conscience is an emotion!

“Look, if I ran the slimes, I would not publish it. But what slimes does is their prerogative.”

Wait. So you would NOT do it? Why not? Aren’t you the one saying it is okay to do it? Now you’re saying it would not be okay for you do it, but okay for someone else. That has all of the illogic of, “I’m personally opposed to abortion, but I wouldn’t want to interfere in someone else’s right to have one.”

“Rest of your post is just going on and on. Have a good night.”

I did have a good night. I hope you have a good day. I hope you learn to put emotions aside and think rationally instead.


43 posted on 11/27/2014 6:04:10 AM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

bttt


44 posted on 11/27/2014 8:30:14 AM PST by catfish1957 (Everything I needed to know about Islam was written on 11 Sep 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson