Finding Common Battle Grounds

In this episode of Finding Common Battle Grounds we discuss whether prostitution should be legalized. As a baseline, both agree that forced prostitution, sex trafficking, and underage sex work should be illegal and is morally wrong. That then leaves the question of whether individuals who choose to sell sex should be allowed to. Josh wants to allow his inner Libertarian to come out and agree that it should be legal but is hesitant because there is evidence that even when it is legal, illegal sex work continues and those working illegally are subject to exploitation, abuse, and violence. Despite a fair number of tangents, Ryan and Josh ultimately agree that, if prostitution can be legalized, carefully regulated, and arranged in such a fashion that sex workers are engaged in this occupation of their own volition and are protected and benefit, then prostitution should be legal. If that isn't what happens, then perhaps it should not.

In this episode of Finding Common Battle Grounds, we discuss the exoneration of Kyle Rittenhouse in Wisconsin over the killing of two individuals and the shooting of a third. In what may seem like a surprise to some listeners, Josh and Ryan (and Tom) agree that Rittenhouse should have been exonerated given the details of the case and the statutes involved. Josh sees this as more black and white than Ryan does, but they both agree. Josh pushes Ryan to admit that this case was framed by the left as about race, which Ryan agrees to begrudgingly as he doesn't see that it really related to race. Ryan gets Josh to agree that carrying around an assault rifle with the intent of intimidating others is in poor taste, though not illegal. Finally, Tom makes the point that the left needs to recognize that violence happens, which Ryan argues is the big fear of the left - that this will embolden those who want to engage in violence.

In this episode of Finding Common Battlegrounds, we discuss Critical Race Theory (CRT). Josh argues that CRT is being taught. Ryan agrees that it is being taught in college, but not really in K-12. Josh also argues that CRT is influencing society and can lead some people to adopt a victim mindset. Ryan equivocates on the degree to which it is influencing society and also dislikes victim mindsets. Ryan takes a more meta approach in this episode and explains what Critical Theory is, then gives specific examples of Critical Race Theory and illustrates how it is used to analyze laws, policies, and regulations. Josh generally agrees with Ryan's description of critical race theory. And, as a bonus, Ryan gets Josh to agree with a statement by Karl Marx (shortly after hell freezes over).

In this episode of Finding Common Battlegrounds, we tackle the question of whether Trump was (or was going to become) a dictator. We agree on  some basic definitions - dictator, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, and fascism. We then agree that Trump was not a dictator despite many dictator-like tendencies, but primarily because of the checks and balances that exist in the US government. We also agree that Trump was/is a terribly cruel, unkind, tyrannical human being. His moral character makes him a difficult political candidate for Josh to stomach. 

In this episode of Finding Common Battle Grounds, Josh, Ryan, and Tom discuss the often-repeated finding that women are paid less money than men, which is commonly referred to as the "gender pay gap." There is general agreement that the gender pay gap exists, but disagreement about how big it is and what the cause is. We agree that other differences between men and women - like hours worked or years on the job - account for some of the differences in pay. Where the primary disagreement lies is in capturing what accounts for the remaining gap. Josh is inclined to think that the gap is not due to sexism but rather other differences between men and women that lead employers to pay women less that are justifiable. Ryan is inclined to think that the gap starts with discrimination due to women being "at-risk" to have a child (a.k.a. the "womb penalty") and then increases over time whenever there are differences in womens' involvement in the labor force due to the higher expectation for women to perform caretaking roles for kids and other family members.

In this episode of Finding Common Battle Grounds, Josh, Ryan, and Tom explore whether there is a liberal bias in the mainstream media. We begin by detailing what we understand the mainstream media to be - major television networks ABC, NBC, and CBS, major newspapers and reporting agencies like Reuters, Associated Press, Newsweek, the New York times, and certain cable and radio stations. We note that there are different ways that bias can manifest in media - in how the news is reported and in what is considered important news. Josh argues that the news - at least political news - is reported with a left-leaning bias in mainstream media while Ryan argues that most non-political news is actually not biased in the mainstream media, even if there is a bias in what is considered important. We agree that journalists may be left-leaning even though many are still objective in their reporting. We also agree that bias is always relative - if you lean to the right, any media to the left will seem biased, and the inverse is true as well. Finally, we agree that MSNBC and Fox News are whores for money and viewers and that it would be ideal if everyone would consumer more middle-of-the-road media like that produced by the Wall Street Journal or BBC News.consume

In this episode of the Finding Common Battle Grounds podcast, we examine  the question of whether conservatives are anti-science. We agree on what science is (a method for investigating the natural world), on the roles of conservatives and progressives, and that there are some scientific findings that are erroneous. But we also agree that science  is self-correcting. Finally, we agree that both conservatives and progressives cherry-pick science, rejecting some scientific findings  that disagree with their preexisting beliefs. This doesn't make either group entirely anti-science, but it does mean that both groups are accurately described as anti-science at times. 

In this issue of Finding Common Battle Grounds we discuss abortion. We chose this topic because of the recently passed law in Texas (Senate Bill 8) restricting abortions to within the first 6 weeks. We find agreement that there should be access to abortions for women who have been raped or when a mother's life is in danger. We even agree that there should be abortions available for others, though we disagree over when access should be cut off. Most of the disagreement in this discussion lies in how abortion is framed by progressives and conservatives and when life begins.

In our first addendum episode, Josh and Ryan revisit their discussion about Afghanistan and whether the US should be leaving. Both admit to being very conflicted about the whole situation. There is clearly a lack of information about what is happening and what has happened in Afghanistan. Josh raises some important questions: Was the Afghan military capable of fighting? And, if the US has hundreds of permanent military bases around the world, why couldn't they keep one in Afghanistan? We end with more questions than answers, recognizing that this is really a humanitarian disaster.

In this episode, Josh, Ryan, and Tom discuss whether the US should have  left Afghanistan. In a strange role reversal, Josh makes a plea to  consider the atrocities that are going to result from the disastrous  exit while Ryan insists that the Afghan people didn't stand up to the  Taliban and it is not the US's responsibility to stay forever and  protect the Afghan people from the Taliban. While we don't find a lot of  agreement in this podcast, it's clear that both sides are sympathetic  to the plight of the Afghan people and think the exit should have been  managed better. There isn't really a good position to take on this  topic.