If you could put up to 3 Bumper Stickers on your Car, what would they be? (Read 408 times)


HobbyJogger & HobbyRacer

    I bet that several recent innovations have had fairly significant effect on marriage in many places:

     

    1) Allowing women to own property

    2) Forbidding a man from having multiple wives simultaneously

    3) Ceasing to treat the wife as the property of the husband

    4) Ceasing to enforce child betrothals

    5) Ceasing the practices of dowry, bride price, and dower

    6) Allowing two men or two women to marry (*)

     

    (*) Gee, I almost forgot #6, which is the point of debate brought up in this very thread.

     

    So, time to vote on how to rank these, in terms of which are the most significant changes (or redefinitions)?

    It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.


    Feeling the growl again

      I have only ever applied one bumper sticker in my life and don't use them anymore so I was not going to contribute to this thread, however after reading this if I were going to apply one I would only need one:

       

      "F@ck Politics"

       

      Seriously.  People have different opinions.  Can we not respect that and realize that they may have perfectly valid reasons for that coming from their own experiences and perspectives without becoming nasty with each other.  Asking for tolerance/equality and then being intolerant towards those who don't agree with you seems a bit hypocritical.  Most social issues do not have a position which can be empirically proven "right".

      "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

       


      HobbyJogger & HobbyRacer

        How about a new bumper sticker: "Tolerate Intolerance"

         

        It would amuse me.

        It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.

          Some things I have been thinking about:

           

          1) Making an argument is different from making a compelling argument.

           

          2) That no one responds to an argument is no proof of the effectiveness of an argument.

           

          3) Even if argument has no compelling or convincing counterargument (that has yet been imagined), it can still be wrong: for example, it might be framed poorly or may disregard data.

           

          4) Most internet arguments beg the question: i.e., they begin from questionable premises and operate only within the bounds of those premises.

           

          All this is to say--arguments are fairly poor tools for persuasion. Experience is usually much more effective. Marriage is changing because our experience of the value of relationships is changing. The fact that marriage used to be something different or emerged in different circumstances has no necessary bearing on the way we (yes, this "we" is still not yet settled) want marriage to be. I think this is where the traditionalist argument goes wrong: the appeal to a prior state of affairs is an appeal to a state of affairs that the opponents of the argument reject prima facie.

           

          The better argument for analysis (seems to me) is the consequentialist argument: keeping marriage as it is will have X effects. Allowing gay marriage will have Y effects. Which effects do we want as a nation? At least this way of analyzing the issue doesn't assume from the outset its conclusion: i.e. that traditional marriage (or gay marriage, for that matter) is THE meaning of marriage. [I'll fully admit that maybe I am cherry-picking methods because I think this method more likely leads to my preferred result: marriage equality.]

           

          KL Duke -- I don't understand your analogy at all with ants. Ants don't always get the job done. In fact, there is a whole animal devoted to ant-eating and the ants have nothing to say about it. Right now most of them running around my kitchen counter have no freaking clue what they are doing.


          HobbyJogger & HobbyRacer

            .. Ants don't always get the job done. In fact, there is a whole animal devoted to ant-eating and the ants have nothing to say about it. Right now most of them running around my kitchen counter have no freaking clue what they are doing.

             

            Are you going to coexist with these ants? Do you believe in their equality?

             

            (Just trying to keep us on track here....)

            It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.

              Right now most of them running around my kitchen counter have no freaking clue what they are doing.

               

              Hope they aren't fire ants Big grin

              steph  

               

              OCD  If you don't laugh...   

                Google "ants fighting" - fascinating stuff.  They don't make arguments, they tear each other apart.

                Come all you no-hopers, you jokers and rogues
                We're on the road to nowhere, let's find out where it goes


                Feeling the growl again

                  Google "ants fighting" - fascinating stuff.  They don't make arguments, they tear each other apart.

                   

                  Experience is much more convincing than arguments.

                  "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                   

                    Umm,  I visited to write down three things for bumper stickers, but I think this thread has moved on from that.

                     

                    In any case, I don't like bumper stickers, so I probably wouldn't put anything.

                     

                    On a lighter note, I remember an interview with an NBA player.  The interviewer asked the player why he didn't have any tattoos.  The player responded with, "You don't see bumper stickers on a Cadillac."

                    Patricia Mulia


                      "So many cats, so few recipes."

                       

                      "Cat, the other white meat."

                       

                      "I love acid."


                      A Saucy Wench

                         

                         

                        I don't feel the need to participate in a senseless rehash in a running forum; please take it somewhere else.

                         

                        Seriously, isn't that what facebook is for?

                         

                        In answer to the original question HELL NO I dont put bumper stickers on my car.  I tolerate the monkey magnet because it is a magnet.  Adhesive should not be put on cars

                         

                        But I did briefly have a bumper magnet with a really bad photo of a close friend on it.  It was a joke (started by the person in the picture) that we kept passing around from unsuspecting victim to unsuspecting victim

                        I have become Death, the destroyer of electronic gadgets

                         

                        "When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - dd, age 7

                        jimmyb


                        port-a-bella-potty

                          Log    PRs

                          mab411


                          Proboscis Colossus

                            I get it, KLD...I've had similar thoughts stone-cold sober: is all our "highly evolved" intellect and society really putting us in a better position to survive, or is it having the opposite effect?

                             

                            I think it has given us the ability to achieve greater things - you don't see ants writing poetry or developing civic systems (at least, not ones different/better than their current one) or living by any kind of code of justice...but then again, the ants don't seem to be systematically destroying themselves as a species, either.

                             

                            Anyway, I have some things to say on the subject at hand, which is apparently gay marriage, but it's a little late.  Maybe tomorrow.

                             

                            It was a good idea for a thread, KLD...some of us tried to keep it fun!

                            "God guides us on our journey, but careful with those feet." - David Lee Roth, of all people

                            mab411


                            Proboscis Colossus

                               

                              Are you going to coexist with these ants? Do you believe in their equality?

                               

                              (Just trying to keep us on track here....)

                               

                              Are they gay ants?

                              "God guides us on our journey, but careful with those feet." - David Lee Roth, of all people

                              Yooper3.1


                                The better argument for analysis (seems to me) is the consequentialist argument: keeping marriage as it is will have X effects. Allowing gay marriage will have Y effects. Which effects do we want as a nation? At least this way of analyzing the issue doesn't assume from the outset its conclusion: i.e. that traditional marriage (or gay marriage, for that matter) is THE meaning of marriage. [I'll fully admit that maybe I am cherry-picking methods because I think this method more likely leads to my preferred result: marriage equality.]

                                Good points-- you are a gentleman and a scholar.  Let me respond:

                                 

                                1. Let's take a consequentialist argument.  If gay "marriage" is accepted by society and sanctioned by the state, then we will have even more children than we do now being raised without a mother or a father, whether as a result of (1) gay couples adopting them or (2) straight couples no longer understanding the purpose of marriage, as it had been traditionally understood.  Given that most of our social ills today can be traced to the breakdown of the family (e.g., studies have shown that a large percentage of prison inmates did not have a father), this is a bad consequence.

                                 

                                2.  An even better approach is the natural law argument-- the idea that there is a Creator and that we can understand his intent and find the right answer (yes, there actually is a right answer) through observation and the use of reason.  Under this approach, we can see that there is a complementarity between the genders (both physical and psychological) that is conducive towards the successful upbringing of children.  This is the benefit that marriage provides society (and gay "marriage" does not).  And why is natural law relevant?  Because our country was founded on it.  The Declaration of Independence says that it is "self-evident"-- obvious and observable-- that there is a Creator and that the Creator has given us certain rights.  If you'd like to dismiss the natual law, then we should rip up our founding documents and start this country over.