I'm inclined to say no.
Not to everyone, of course, and not even to those who disagree with me. No, I just want to cut off this whole "right to my opinion" thing for people who don't have a freaking clue and can't be bothered to get one.
Again, whether or not I think you have a clue does NOT depend on whether or not you agree with me. It depends entirely upon whether or not you have a basic understanding of the basic factual information necessary to FORM a meaningful opinion. If you'd prefer not to be bothered with the facts, that's fine: just acknowledge that you don't know enough to have an opinion and SHUT UP. Or, if you really, really feel strongly about your "rights" (even though you're probably misusing the term), go right ahead and form an opinion without any of the necessary information...but then keep it to yourself. Please. Don't confuse others, who might assume that you know what you're talking about.
And here's a tip: it's not a good investment of time to go around forming strong opinions about things that never happened.
Just a few examples:
The Supreme Court did NOT make a recent ruling relating to victims of domestic violence--rather, it made a ruling with universal applicability to the admission of certain kinds of testimony in criminal cases.
A UK court did NOT sentence a man to one day in jail for the murder of a prostitute--it sentences him to one day in addition to approximately thirty months of time already served.
The woman who burned herself with McDonald's coffee did NOT win millions of dollars--and she did suffer very serious injuries necessitating reconstructive surgery.
Bottom line: learn the facts. Or don't. It's your call. But if you choose not to know anything then please, please, please...also choose not to share your ignorance.
8 comments:
i love makin rumours.. even without any strong foundation.. and i always says to people that "if" it's true so it is true.. :D
Very good point! Ignorance begets ignorance. And I think it also comes down to arrogance. The ignorant are not only louder but also much more arrogant than the "fact" people.
A UK court did NOT sentence a man to one day in jail for the murder of a prostitute--it sentences him to one day in addition to approximately thirty months of time already served.
This actually happened in St.Catherines, Ontario in the Ryczyak case. He didn't serve approximately thirty months the judge said the pre-sentence time(12 mths) was the equivalent of thirty months. The sentence is now being appealed.
I agree with the rest of your post though.
Renee, you are absolutely right--and I guess I'm proving my own point, hm? Of all posts to attempt to rely on memory to create, this was obviously the wrong one!
Thanks for straightening out the details.
Well said. It seems that many people believe they have a right to formulate and opinion and state it without doing any research and examining the facts. This trend towards displaying arrogance and ignorance for all to see is found on every forum I visit.
Thanks for posting this opinion. I get so tired of listening to people who spout off on things they know nothing about, like peole who believe they could forecast the weather or build roads better than the experts.
angelawd
I agree if people don't have the facts they shouldn't get an opinion. This includes people like Senator Clinton voting for giving Bush the authority to go to war with Iraq without reading the intelligence assessment nor having anyone on staff with high enough clearance to inform her.
That is a really good point, Cup is Half Full; I've been arguing for a while that people really shouldn't be out voting if they haven't chosen to acquaint themselves with the candidates or the requirements of the jobs they'll be performing, but the idea that the same issue goes up a step (or several steps) higher in the process is interesting and troubling.
Post a Comment