Quotes About Debate

You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

The clash of ideas is the sound of freedom.

Wasn't that what religions did? Squint at one another and declare, 'My unprovable belief is better than your unprovable belief. Suck it.

but wasn't that what religions did? Squint at one another and declare, "My unprovable belief is better than your unprovable belief. Suck it.

He is no lawyer who cannot take two sides.

The problem Creationists identify is with the word 'theory', not with the case for evolution

In France, everyone in the family has a job. The parent's role is to be the chief, and the children have the job of obeying their leader. French children are raised with this in mind, so there is much less debate and resistance.

Here in the United States, the words "sleep training" are as controversial and brimming with emotion as "breast-feeding." Or

The present legislative trend is to marginalize the status of sex offenders and, in the process, to regard them as less than fully human. While this strategy may make for good politics, it is a far cry from establishing sound policy. Framing the debate much like a "war" in which innocent victims are subject to devastating assault by evil, predatory, and callous offenders does nothing but inflame emotions at the expense of promoting reasoned judgment.

any book incapable of offending someone isn't worth the time it takes to read it.

I do not want to muddle about with Politicks, and whenever two Folk of any sort are in a room together there are always Politicks to be muddled in.

There's no fun in arguing if you never get shown up. Who plays a game it there's no chance they'll lose? I do so crave to be proven wrong,. It is as sweet as proving yourself right, when done properly.

People generally quarrel because they cannot argue.

She just kept on criticizing me, but for contradictory reasons.

Atunci de ce v? obosiÈ›i explicând ceea ce am spus eu, în loc s? m? întreceÈ›i È™i s? m? desfiinÈ›aÈ›i cu alte opere? Dac? am spus bine ceea ce am spus, pentru ce o spuneÈ›i voi din nou într-un mod mizerabil? Dac? alÈ›ii nu pricep vorbele mele, merit? oare s?-i faceÈ›i s? le priceap?, chiar aÈ™a cum le-am însemnat È™i le-am gravat eu în serile cele mai spumeg?toare ale inspiraÈ›iei mele?

Only those afraid of the truth seek to silence debate, intimidate those with whom they disagree, or slander their ideological counterparts. Those who know they are right have no reason to stifle debate because they realize that all opposing arguments will ultimately be overcome by fact.

You cannot take away freedom to protect it, you cannot destroy the free market to save it, and you cannot uphold freedom of speech by silencing those with whom you disagree. To take rights away to defend them or to spend your way out of debt defies common sense.

It is only on the battlefield of ideas that the best ones can be recognized and ultimately prevail. Only those afraid of the truth seek to silence debate, intimidate those with whom they disagree, or slander their ideological counterparts. Those who know they are right have no reason to stifle debate because they realize that all opposing arguments will ultimately be overcome by fact.

the people who talk most about the need to regulate guns are also usually the same people who know the least about them. Ask these gun prohibitionists about the Second Amendment and they'll usually mention hunting or sport shooting.

Only those afraid of the truth seek to silence debate, intimidate those with whom they disagree, or slander their ideological counterparts.

If we are really going to debate how criminals might access, modify, convert or adapt guns to fit their needs, then we can put all of the other arguments behind us right now, because none of them make a difference. That said, it's pretty telling just how weak your argument is when you have to resort to a 'yeah, but criminals might...' stance to make your point.

Control the language and you control the argument.

It's almost hard to imagine anything more undemocratic than the view that political officials should not debate American wars in public, but only express concerns 'privately with the administration.' That's just a small sliver of Johnson's radicalism: replacing Feingold in the Senate with Ron Johnson would be a civil liberties travesty analogous to the economic travesty from, say, replacing Bernie Sanders with Lloyd Blankfein.

Se prego in cuor mio che la consapevolezza e il dibattito pubblico porteranno a una riforma, so anche che le politiche degli uomini mutano nel tempo, e persino la Costituzione viene sovvertita quando la fame di potere lo richiede. Traendo insegnamento dalla storia, dunque, non si parli più di fiducia nell'uomo, ma si vincoli quest'ultimo, contro il mal fare, con le catene della crittografia.