If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.
You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!
Wolf Blitzer: Here is what you said: "Here in Massachusetts, activist judges struck a blow to the foundation of civilization, the family. They ruled that our Constitution requires same-sex marriage. Unless we adopt a federal amendment to protect marriage, what is happening here will unquestionably enter every other state."
Wolf Blitzer: This pits you at odds with a lot of people out there, including the daughter of the vice president, Dick Cheney, Mary Cheney, who was here in THE SITUATION ROOM not that long ago.
Listen to what she said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARY CHENEY, DAUGHTER OF VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY: Same-sex marriage is obviously an issue that we can disagree on, and that this country needs to debate. But the notion of amending the Constitution and writing -- basically, writing discrimination into the Constitution of the United States is fundamentally wrong.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Wolf Blitzer: All right. You want to tell our viewers why you disagree with Mary Cheney?
Governor Mitt Romney: Well, because marriage is a fundamental institution in our society. It's not primarily about adults. The challenge that people have who are staunch defenders of gay marriage focus on adult rights. But marriage is primarily not about adults, but about kids. A child and their development and nurturing is enhanced by access and by the nurturing of two parents of two different genders.
And, so, as we think about the development of children, and the future of our nation and its ability to raise a generation, we need to have homes where there are moms and dads. So, I favor traditional marriage, not out of any sense of discrimination.
Governor Mitt Romney: And I think we should show an outpouring of respect and tolerance for people of differences and people that make different choices.
Wolf Blitzer: But let me get this straight. Are you suggesting that children who have two fathers or two mothers, two gay men or two lesbian mothers, that those children are going to be growing up in some sort of weird environment? Is that what you're saying...
Wolf Blitzer: ... that this going to affect their ability to be normal kids?
Governor Mitt Romney: I'm saying that the ideal setting for raising a child is where there is a mother and a father.
Now, of course, we have a lot of homes where there is a single mom. And that's not ideal, but, I mean, there are some -- but there are some great families.
Wolf Blitzer: If there two loving -- two loving parents who happen to be the same sex...
Governor Mitt Romney: There's no -- Wolf, there's no question, but that having access to a mother and a father, people of both genders, is the ideal for the development of a child.
Wolf Blitzer: But what if there's -- what if there are two loving parents who are of the same sex? Can't they raise a kid...
Governor Mitt Romney: What I -- but my view is that we should have a constitutional amendment that says that marriage is defined as a relationship between a man and a woman.
And the reason it's so important to do at a federal level -- and I know some people say they are against gay marriage, but let the states decide. Well, if one state decides that they are going to have gay marriage, and they marry people from all over the country, then, every state ends up with gay marriage, because people move around this country.
And, ultimately, the Supreme Court may well say that, under the full faith and credit clause, if you're married in one state...
Governor Mitt Romney: Once a court, as it is in Massachusetts, says that we're indifferent between same-sex marriage and traditional marriage, then, what you have on the -- in our schools is a desire to avoid what they call heterocentricity.
So, we have kids in a second-grade class in Massachusetts being taught from a book called "The King and the King," where a prince doesn't find a princess to marry, but another prince. And they become the kings.
We begin to say that we're indifferent between a marriage between a man and a woman and two men or two women. And we're not indifferent as a society. Fundamentally, as a society, overall, we want homes with moms and dads.
Now, if individuals want to do -- take a different course and enter into contracts with one another that are between same-sex individuals, they're free to do so. But marriage, as a term and as an institution, should be associated with men and women.
Wolf Blitzer: You know, Mary Cheney, when she was here -- and she is a lesbian...
Wolf Blitzer: ... she said that you -- she didn't know what your position was, but those who support what you -- you want a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage -- are on the wrong side of history, sort of like the old laws that would prevent African-Americans from marrying white people.
It's not the wrong side of history, because, actually, in the whole history of the world, from the very beginning of recorded history, marriage has always meant a relationship between a man and a woman.
Look, if two people of the same gender want to live together and enter into a contract with each other, so be it. But don't pretend that it's marriage. And society, as a whole, will benefit by having its children, on the average, raised by moms and dads.
Cheney lashes out at Wolf Blitzer
Do you want to tell our viewers why you disagree with Mary Cheney
Einstein said, “You cannot solve a problem with the same mind that created it.” Similarly, we won’t improve our country until we improve our level of public debate. On these pages I outline how we can automate conflict resolution and cost-benefit analysis and solve our problems at a level higher than how they were caused.
To start, we will break our problems down into their sub-components, including beliefs, supporting, and weakening evidence, and arguments. This will allow thousands or millions of us to evaluate each part of an argument and evidence one at a time. We will group beliefs by topic and sort them by their positivity, strength, and level of specificity. This will prevent duplication and allow us to focus on one issue at a time.
The Idea Stock Exchange (ISE) proposes a groundbreaking framework for tackling complex issues, resolving conflicts, and fostering informed decision-making. Here's a detailed breakdown of its key features:
Evidence-driven: Prioritizes verifiable data and logical reasoning, ensuring well-informed conclusions.
Dynamic Ranking System: Inspired by Google's PageRank, it evaluates arguments based on the strength of their evidence, dynamically adjusting as new information emerges.
2. Multi-faceted Evaluation Metrics:
Cost-Benefit Analysis: Assesses proposed solutions by examining potential costs, benefits, likelihoods, and impact.
Argumentative Strength Assessment: Categorizes arguments based on logical consistency, evidence, relevance, and significance.
Maslow's Hierarchy Integration: Aligns the evaluation with fundamental human needs for a broader perspective.
3. Sophisticated Scoring and Ranking Protocols:
Precision Scoring Formula: Combines argument scores with evidence assessments to determine argument validity.
Evidence-Based Ranking System: Leverages algorithms to rank solutions based on predicted costs and benefits, with dynamic updates based on new information.
4. Uniqueness and Redundancy Scores:
Equivalency Score: Identifies similar arguments using semantic similarity metrics and machine learning, coupled with community feedback, to reduce redundancy and develop unique scores.
"Better Ways of Saying the Same Thing": Helps users find alternative expressions of the same idea, enhancing clarity and reducing duplication.
5. Logical Fallacy and Argument Evaluation:
Fallacy Detection: Implements algorithms to identify and flag potentially fallacious arguments, promoting rational discourse.
User-Contributed Evidence Assessment: Allows the community to contribute evidence supporting or weakening arguments for collaborative verification.
6. Technological Integration and User Interaction:
Database Tools: Proposes building tools to map conclusions, assumptions, and their relationships for deeper understanding.
Interactive Interface: Users can actively participate by submitting evidence, voting on argument strength, and suggesting alternative viewpoints.
7. Promoting Quality Debate:
Separating Argument Types: Distinguishes between truth, importance, and relevance arguments for a more nuanced debate structure.
Encouraging Constructive Dialogue: Aims to shift focus from emotional responses to evidence-based reasoning, fostering meaningful discourse over sensationalism.
8. Community-Driven Evolution:
Open-Source Development: Encourages community involvement in refining and evolving the platform, ensuring its adaptability and relevance.
Additional Considerations:
Data Quality and Bias: Implementing robust measures to ensure data accuracy and mitigate potential biases in algorithms and user contributions.
Transparency and Explainability: Providing clear explanations of scoring methods and decision-making processes to build trust and understanding.
User Engagement and Education: Fostering active participation and educating users on the platform's functionalities and responsible use.
We are a political party that organizes all the ideas and arguments by subject, and lets them battle in a survival of the fittest death-match.
We are a political party that supports candidates that promises to make their decisions based on online cost benefit and idea evaluation algorithms. They just have to use a forum that ties the strength of their conclusion to the strength of their assumption, so that when you strengthen or weaken an assumption you also strengthen or weaken conclusions based on the assumption.
We have had the technological ability to create a world based on logic for too long. It is about time we build a rational political party based on the assumption that we support plans, conclusions, activities, and policies that can gather evidence based support, and that we don't do things that don't stand up to analysis.
We will conduct open, online, cost/benefit analysis of each issue. It is about time.
Welcome to the website for the best political party of all time, and the future of reason based decisions making.
"No concept you form is valid unless you integrate it without contradiction into the sum of human knowledge."
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.