From: Stuart Jansen <[email protected]>
>>>> Thus, Michael may be Canadian, but Canada isn't as friendly
>>>> to private health insurance as he makes it out to be, either!
>>>
>>> But you lied when you said private health insurance was illegal.
>>> Plain and simple.
>>
>> He may have erred, but that does not mean he lied. To lie
>> includes an element of intent to deceive, a serious charge.
>
> I stand by my original statement. Alpheus was parroting lies.
> That makes him a liar.
First of all, I was parroting a news report that I had read weeks earlier--that
does not make me a liar, because I firmly believed what I parroted. All of us
learn facts, and all of us learn what we *think* are facts, and there are
plenty of both that it is impossible to hunt down and make sure every single
fact we encounter is true. If we trust in some source, and repeat it, that
does not make us liars. In a court, it would be hearsay, but I have a funny
feeling that these threads don't follow the rules of the court in submitting
evidence.
When I searched to back up my claim, though, I discovered something: measured
by Canadian providences, I was 60% right, and for the remainder of providences,
there is enough regulation to make it so that it's practically illegal.
>
> There may be a difference between creating a lie and repeating
> it, but I'm not sure it matters much. Some might argue for a
> softer, more politically correct term, but I prefer to aim for
> clarity.
>
> There's plenty of precedent for considering someone a liar even
> if they don't know they're mistaken. ("You made a liar out of
> me, boy!")
There is also plenty of precedent for pointing out that someone is mistaken
when they are, and not call them a liar. To the extent that I'm *still*
defending my position, I may *still* be mistaken, but I'm not a liar on this
issue.
> Alpheus should not be asking himself, "am I a liar?" Clearly he
> is. Instead, the question is "Why did I prefer to listen to and
> repeat the lie?"
>
> We're all liars and hypocrites at different times. The question
> is, are we also strong enough to acknowledge reality, or will we
> continue to use emotional filters to ignore truths we're don't
> want to hear. Political correctness will not help us arrive at
> truth.
We will always use emotional filters to ignore truths we don't want to hear,
for two reasons: because often hold strongly to our beliefs, and because so
many "truths" have not been absolutely decided--indeed, the studies that
attempt to shed light on the issues may be deeply flawed. That doesn't mean we
give up on emotions and studies! because these are the things that make debate
so interesting.
Now that I think about it, the study I discovered was conducted for the purpose
of addressing the "Is Private Health Care in Canada Illegal?" So apparently
when the claim was first made, it needed verification...and it was discovered
that the claim was partly true.
Of course, things could easily change overnight, especially with regards to
regulations! which makes stating facts even more difficult, because they could
change without notice to those "parroting" them. (In which case, they would be
mistaken, and not liars.)
____________________________________________________________
$13/Month Car Insurance?
Insurance deal just passed now allows you to get car insurance for $13
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4bc6677c61bb26aeecst04vuc
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
