I guess all the ppl in the world love american, eh!

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

You can shmaloney baloney as much as you want, but morality = delineating from right or wrong.

Right or Wrong is codified in our US Laws.

The history of US Laws is based on JudeoChristian principles (all the way back to English common law).

US laws change based on social norms. Social norms in the1960s(most of the people going to some church on Sundays) is much different than social norms of 2010s (no religion in school). The moral standards have changed. Would you say for the better?

Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian as role models for little girls? Look at Facebook and read what teenage girls are writing. Would you say the moral standards today are for the better?

Hiding your head under the ground like an Ostrich does not solve any problems.

Dude, I'm a lawyer. An ENGLISH lawyer, even, but an American by birth. I know a little about the history of common law in both England and America. The common law certainly does look to Judeo-Christian moral precepts, which in many cases had more to do with practicality than fear of a deity. It also borrows heavily from Roman law, pre-Christian native Britannic custom and a lot of common sense.

Why yes, I would say moral standards in this country have improved in some regards. One need look only to the abolition of slavery, the extension of the franchise to women, the removal of Jim Crow laws as but a few examples of how life in this country has improved since "the good old days." It's utter hogwash that Paris Hilton or Kim Kardashian are role models for all little girls -- I am the friend of mothers of quite a few little girls, and those girls are not being raised in the cult of celebrity, nor do I expect that even a majority are raised that way. Have morals changed for the better in all regards? No, but the answer is always going to be more complex than a simple binary "yes" or "no."

It's utterly facile to point to Facebook and say "look at they're writing!!!" Were YOU a young teenage girl in the pre-internet days? Do you have any idea what we talked about then? Furthermore, I hear no discussion about the morals of boys and young men here. Is the supposed downfall of America to be hung as a dirty mantle around the shoulders of its daughters alone?

Edit: clarity.

Edited May 1, 2012 by Honey Crumpet

[AngelAndJoy 22]

A large number of Aemrican men watch porn, which is pretty much legal under US laws. What is your point?

Read the thread to get the point.

There is a morality issue in our American society. Period.

[^_^ 5,021]

Is the supposed downfall of America to be hung as a dirty mantle around the shoulders of its daughters alone?

Edit: clarity.

yes.

next question, please.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Read the thread to get the point.

There is a morality issue in our American society. Period.

I have done so. I'm afraid you have no "point" to get.

[B_J 2,752]

Health insurance sucks, paid vacations are non existant, ditto for maternity leaves, guns everywhere and super costly education. No, I don't love the US (America is a continent, not a country), but, alas, sometimes you have to make some sacrifices in life.

Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. It is a kind of fallacy of selective attention, the most common example of which is the confirmation bias. Cherry picking may be committed unintentionally.[1]

The term is based on the perceived process of harvesting fruit, such as cherries. The picker would be expected to only select the ripest and healthiest fruits. An observer who only sees the selected fruit may thus wrongly conclude that most, or even all, of the fruit is in such good condition.

Cherry picking can be found in many logical fallacies. For example, the "fallacy of anecdotal evidence" tends to overlook large amounts of data in favor of that known personally, "selective use of evidence" rejects material unfavorable to an argument, while a false dichotomy picks only two options when more are available.

Such a wonderfully long post that does no good.

The quote I referred to is where you stated these things as absolute facts. Reread what you wrote. "Paid vacation non existent." So, all I have to do is find one instance of it's existence, and you're proven wrong. Same for maternity leave.

You also stated "guns are everywhere." You didn't say many or most places; you said "everywhere". So, again, if I can find one place where they are not, then you are proven wrong... again.

I'll leave health insurance and education alone, since you used adjectives to describe them. But that would mean we're talking about opinion instead of facts.

You are clearly smarter than this....

So I ask again, where are your objective facts? And where did you get your supposed knowledge of this country?

[Gigli2008 70]

I'm almost speechless.

You've posted so much about the US and yet you've never been here. Seriously?!?!

You've made multiple posts criticizing this country and it's citizens; yet you've never been here.

Where did you get your supposed knowledge of this country?

I nearly fell of my chair for that one. Never did I imagine that Peter_Pan had not set foot in this country.

BTW, I had a co-worker whose mother was Romanian and father from some other country close by Romania (don't remember) but lived in Romania since she was born. All I remember about that co-worker is the on and on and on being anti-American. This is the second time I am seeing this, and hopefully the last. She came here on a student visa to advance her degree. To avoid deportation she married a US citizen. She now has citizenship and subsequently petitioned for her mother, father and brother to leave Romania so they can all live in the US. And all the while she was bashing the US - constantly. Calls her American husband an "idiot" behind his back, and is all lovey-dovey in public. Unbelievable.

Edited May 1, 2012 by Gigli2008

[^_^ 5,021]

Read the thread to get the point.

There is a morality issue in our American society. Period.

i love your tone of certainty. it makes you sound confident and makes me more likely to believe you. there's no nuance in what you say, just categorical assertions. that means you are right and helps me ignore all these nuanced types (like honey crumpetty crump) who use lots of big words but i know i dont need to understand what they say because you are right so they must be wrong.

thank you for participating in this thread. you're like a ray of sunshine in this place. please don't let the crumpets drive you away!!!

[AngelAndJoy 22]

Dude, I'm a lawyer. An ENGLISH lawyer, even, but an American by birth. I know a little about the history of common law in both England and America. The common law certainly does look to Judeo-Christian moral precepts, which in many cases had more to do with practicality than fear of a deity. It also borrows heavily from Roman law, pre-Christian native Britannic custom and a lot of common sense.

Why yes, I would say moral standards in this country have improved in some regards. One need look only to the abolition of slavery, the extension of the franchise to women, the removal of Jim Crow laws as but a few examples of how life in this country has improved since "the good old days." It's utter hogwash that Paris Hilton or Kim Kardashian are role models for all little girls -- I am the friend of mothers of quite a few little girls, and those girls are not being raised in the cult of celebrity, nor do I expect that even a majority are raised that way. Have morals changed for the better in all regards? No, but the answer is always going to be more complex than a simple binary "yes" or "no."

It's utterly facile to point to Facebook and say "look at they're writing!!!" Were YOU a young teenage girl in the pre-internet days? Do you have any idea what we talked about then? Furthermore, I hear no discussion about the morals of boys and young men here. Is the supposed downfall of America to be hung as a dirty mantle around the shoulders of its daughters alone?

Edit: clarity.

From immoral women comes immoral sons.

Facebook is a reflection of today's thoughts. I am very sure teenagers in the 50s and 60s did not talk about F-buddies as they do today. You OK with your daughter's F-buddies? Is that a great moral change for you? Hahahahaha..

OHHHHHHHHHHHHH-KAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY.

[Peter_Pan 661]

Such a wonderfully long post that does no good.

The quote I referred to is where you stated these things as absolute facts. Reread what you wrote. "Paid vacation non existent." So, all I have to do is find one instance of it's existence, and you're proven wrong. Same for maternity leave.

You also stated "guns are everywhere." You didn't say many or most places; you said "everywhere". So, again, if I can find one place where they are not, then you are proven wrong... again.

I'll leave health insurance and education alone, since you used adjectives to describe them. But that would mean we're talking about opinion instead of facts.

You are clearly smarter than this....

So I ask again, where are your objective facts? And where did you get your supposed knowledge of this country?

Hyperbole (play /haɪˈpɜrbəliː/ hy-PUR-bə-lee;[1] Greek: ὑπερβολή, 'exaggeration') is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.[2]

Hyperboles are exaggerations to create emphasis or effect. As a literary device, hyperbole is often used in poetry, and is frequently encountered in casual speech. An example of hyperbole is: "The bag weighed a ton."[3] Hyperbole helps to make the point that the bag was very heavy, although it is not probable that it would actually weigh a ton.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

I have done so. I'm afraid you have no "point" to get.

Silly Trompe. It's not the fault of the men. We American wimminz just LEAD them astray with our filthy morals. And our paper diplomas.

[Peter_Pan 661]

I nearly fell of my chair for that one. Never did I imagine that Peter_Pan had not set foot in this country.

BTW, I had a co-worker whose mother was Romanian and father from some other country close by Romania (don't remember) but lived in Romania since she was born. All I remember about that co-worker is the on and on and on being anti-American. This is the second time I am seeing this, and hopefully the last. She came here on a student visa to advance her degree. To avoid deportation she married a US citizen. She now has citizenship and subsequently petitioned for her mother, father and brother to leave Romania so they can all live in the US. And all the while she was bashing the US - constantly. Calls her American husband an "idiot" behind his back, and is all lovey-dovey in public. Unbelievable.

And he isn't an idiot? Cause he sounds like one to me.

[james&olya 1,121]

Considering millions of people die every year crossing a border to get here for a better life and then get treated like outright sh!t, get deported and then try again??

You can't just make up sh!t to try and prove your 'point'! Everyone has a right to their opinion but facts are facts. Unless, of course, you are on faux news!

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

From immoral women comes immoral sons.

Facebook is a reflection of today's thoughts. I am very sure teenagers in the 50s and 60s did not talk about F-buddies as they do today. You OK with your daughter's F-buddies? Is that a great moral change for you? Hahahahaha..

OHHHHHHHHHHHHH-KAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY.

What about immoral fathers?

[^_^ 5,021]

From immoral women comes immoral sons.

Preach it!!!!!!!!!

[Gigli2008 70]

Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. It is a kind of fallacy of selective attention, the most common example of which is the confirmation bias. Cherry picking may be committed unintentionally.[1]

The term is based on the perceived process of harvesting fruit, such as cherries. The picker would be expected to only select the ripest and healthiest fruits. An observer who only sees the selected fruit may thus wrongly conclude that most, or even all, of the fruit is in such good condition.

Cherry picking can be found in many logical fallacies. For example, the "fallacy of anecdotal evidence" tends to overlook large amounts of data in favor of that known personally, "selective use of evidence" rejects material unfavorable to an argument, while a false dichotomy picks only two options when more are available.

Since you are educated, you should know that when you post something that is not your own work, you should 1) quote and 2) give credit to the person/source of said work.

In this case you plagiarized wikipedia.

Edited May 1, 2012 by Gigli2008