Well that's the thing.Farther than stars said:And that's my point. She "may very well be just another person who fears something [she] doesn't understand", but that's an assumption on your part. She may also have made that unbiased and informed decision, but just because it falls out against your side, you dismiss her as being "too old to try [and understand] at [her] time of life". And speaking of biases, that last part is just slander, plain and simple.I.Muir said:So why then say such an unfounded statement? It may very well be just another person who fears something they don't understand and too old to try at their time of life. If that is the case how likely are they to make an unbiased and informed decision which would be using that intelligence they apparently posses.
I don't think any decision made against video games with such flimsy support to back it up CAN be an unbiased and informed decision. My personal bias does not help but as an example if It were up to me I wouldn't ban Justin Bieber music because it causes teen pregnancy without seeing some damn evidence of this being the case first.
Then again being a politician she may be blindly lashing out at something/ anything to please the people.
Remind me again exactly what part is slander and why?