"There's more to the story"

[Rageaholic]

This is something I hear a lot on here and in other debates. Someone will post an article about something ridiculous and will start a discussion. Someone will come along and instead of at least trying to justify the reasoning behind it, they will attack the source, and make up their own story.

Now I could never fault someone for questioning something. There are a lot of news stories that are questionable at best. There are usually stuff missing from those stories that leave a lot to be answered. And as we all know, the news loves to embelish stuff to make it sell better. Accepting everything that's handed to us as truth without analyzing it is never a good idea.

But this rant is not directed at those who are spectical, it's directed at those who throw this defense around as an accusation because they don't want to admit that their favorite political party, politician, or celebrity has faults. In those instances, even if every news story read the same, they would still find blame with the other party, based on some unfounded claim that they made up. It turns healthy specticism into baseless claims. And, I don't know about everyone else, but baseless claims are always the ones I'm most spectical about.

[draggar]

News flash to those people: everyone has faults.

Acknowledging them is being mature.

Learning from them is even more mature.

As for the people I've looked up to, if I've known about their faults, I've acknowledged them.

[Rageaholic]

Yup, there is nothing wrong with acknowledging faults. Everyone has faults, no one is perfect. If having faults meant you had to hate someone, everyone would have to be hated. It's more healthy for everyone to acknowledge them instead of beating yourself or others up over them.