2007-06-29 11:03:43 · 8 answers · asked by justgoodfolk 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sure emotions have a place. We are human beings, not robots.
But that place for emotions? That is what we disagree on. I do not think emotions should govern public policy decisions. I think emotions are too unstable. And we all have them.
2007-06-29 11:07:56 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Telling them what they want to hear with just the right emotion can seal the deal, that is the upside AND the downside.
Emotions do have a place in politics because the dialogue would become so dry and robotic without them, we just need to be careful that the passionate or emotional delivery doesn't distract us from what is really being said
2007-07-01 01:37:46 · answer #2 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but you can use logic as well. People who use blind emotion are just that - blind. They cannot see anyone else's point of view, nor can they logically think about right from wrong - they are just right. To counter that, I would not want a President who had a complete lack of compassion for anything or anyone.
The balance of emotion and logic is perhaps a big dividing factor of our 2 parties. On some issues, one party might think about something more logically, while the other thinks more emotionally. It's very hard to reconcile an issue when you're using different methods to make a decision - and it's hard to reason with a emotion...especially when they may not realize they're using emotion (i.e., to some it's logical to have the Patriot Act put in place because they think it keeps us safe, but I look at that and see people allowing bad decisions to be made out of fear).
Good question.
2007-06-29 18:12:36 · answer #3 · answered by shelly 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They are in politics - just look at the Immigration Bill. I thought the GOP politicians were going to start popping arteries and having strokes.
*ruth is off on her magic carpet again. Ok - I'll bite. Where do those societal morals come from? Bet I know already......
**Nobody is stopping you from speaking, getting a bit defensive aren't you? Or is it a little ashamed? If you pitch it out there - I'm going to take a swing at it. You get no passes from me. Original intent "interpretation" is pie in the sky without historical background. Read it again without the preconceptions of what your biased viewpoint wants to see. The framers were a lot smarter than you and far less biased.
***Here's a hint - Start with Locke and the Enlightenment. Read what they were reading.
"Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government" - Madison
2007-06-29 18:10:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
You get stuck with Bush, just look at the so-called "values voters", that's a pretty great danger right there.
2007-06-29 18:07:03 · answer #5 · answered by ck4829 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
dangers r u dont think with facts only with your opinion
2007-06-29 18:09:25 · answer #6 · answered by Reyna 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
emotions can be manipulated.
2007-06-29 18:12:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
yes they do it's called the democratic party. it's all they have.
2007-06-29 18:09:56 · answer #8 · answered by andy c 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋