[q=edczxcvbnm]That place is just a flame room anyways. How am I really going to talk about GW without bad mouthing him like crazy? Someone is going to take great offense to that...probably and that is like attacking their beliefs almost. They are going to fight back.
[/q]Like Citizen Bleys said, saying nasty things about politicians isn't the issue. If someone starts a thread simply to bad-mouth Bush, it'll probably just get closed. If, however, someone makes a personal attack - for instance, saying that a member who supports Bush is a rednecked retard, or descrying any war opponents as evil terrorists, then it becomes a problem. People should be free to discuss and express their opinions without being insulted for it. It should be perfectly simply to debate a topic without making it personal.
Here's an example. Suppose someone makes a thread about Communism. I then post saying that I don't approve of Communism and giving reasons why. Someone then responds saying that I'm a mindless freak who's a pathetic slave of the evil system and simply incapable of seeing the plain truth. That last statement is an opinion, of course, but one that's unnecessary and unwelcome since it's just a personal attack.
A debate should follow this format:
"I support X notion."
"I disagree for Y reason."
"Z is the flaw in reason Y."
"Evidence Q supports reason Y."
This may seem boring, but it's civil and productive. Far better than...
"I support X notion."
"NOO j00 r t3h wrong! I r t3h rite cuz j00 r t3h stupid!"
Here's to rational, impersonal disputation.
