Quotes About Debate

My mother was Catholic, my father was Protestant. There was always a debate going on at home - I think in those days we called them arguments - about who was right and who was wrong.

I will come out with my interpretation. If I'm wrong, fine. It will become part of the debris of history, part of the give and take.

In all intellectual debates, both sides tend to be correct in what they affirm, and wrong in what they deny.

There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.

I've got no problem with anybody's religion. But if you go claiming the Earth is only 10,000 years old, that's just wrong.

Sometimes economists are right, and sometimes economists are wrong.

There is nothing wrong with intellectual differences flowing from freedom of thought as long as such differences remain confined to intellectual debates.

There are two sides to every question: my side and the wrong side.

Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher did more to liberate people by defeating the Soviet Union and freeing eastern Europe than the Obamas, the Clintons, and Kerrys of this world ever have. They were all on the wrong side of that debate.

I had a moment where I left journalism, and I started getting interested in this issue and writing about it, where I felt there was a right side and a wrong side around a lot of these issues relating to education.

A little tough talk in the midst of a campaign or as part of a presidential debate cannot obscure a record of 30 years of being on the wrong side of defense issues.

It is not possible to debate the balance between privacy and security, including the rights and wrongs of intrusive powers, without also understanding the threats.

I once wrote that anybody who believes the world is only 6,000 years old is either ignorant, stupid, insane or wicked.

For the longest time, Cena would be, and still is, filibustered by half the WWE universe.

We've got to stand up at some point and say, 'We are not gonna pay slavery reparations in the United States Congress.' That war's been fought. That was over a century ago. That debt was paid for in blood, and it was paid for in the blood of a lot of Yankees, especially. And there's no reparations for the blood that paid for the sin of slavery.

Most of us know nothing about constitutional law, so it's hardly surprising that we take sides in the Obamacare debate the way we root for the Red Sox or the Yankees. Loyalty to the team is what matters.

Now undoubtedly, we face some very British challenges when it comes to infrastructure. We rightly cherish our back yards and green spaces, and we'll defend them passionately when projects are announced. We live in a democracy, and we like to debate these things, often for many years.

After a century of striving, after a year of debate, after a historic vote, health care reform is no longer an unmet promise. It is the law of the land.

While some debate its helpfulness at generating monetizable traffic, when Digg points to a story, huge audience spikes quickly follow.

I often get attacked in Saudi Arabia, but the critics don't ridicule my ideas. There were about 30 or 40 articles attacking me in the Saudi press. Not a single one debated something I wrote. They just ridiculed me as a person. They see me as a traitor who is writing in the foreign press. But discuss what I am writing? They will not.

The Second Amendment is not open for debate. Why do Democrats feel that this is the one enumerated Constitutional right that they can trample?

For too long, opponents of the PATRIOT Act have transformed this law into a grossly distorted caricature that bears no relation to the legislation itself.

From the days when I was a kid, and I would sit at the dinner table with Dad, we would debate everything, from the best hamburger in the world to the most important news items. We always had real challenging conversations. That translated to hanging out with my buddies. It wasn't always something cerebral or important.

Some say the Constitution has robbed us of a proper land redistribution process. Others would want to look at other clauses. Well, it's South Africa. Everything is transparent and open for debate.