Total posts: 4,920
-->
@Stephen
Wiki admits itself to being a "unreliable" source of information.
Where is your source?
I also checked the source and they go to .org websites.
The USA had nothing to do with his trial or sentance. I agree there was a power vacuum left by the allies.
But they were forcing their hand.
If you wish to discuss Western interference in Middle East affairs, then start a thread of your own.
I'll wait for your next thread that you will give a barely substantiated point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Virtue signalling: an attempt to show other people that you are a good person, for example byexpressing opinions that will be acceptable to them, especially on socialmedia:
How is this a bad thing?
Is the entirety of Australia virtue signalling about plastic?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
You didn't answer my question. I'll ask a different one.
What is the difference between zombie Jesus day and Easter?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Islamic_State_of_Iraq_(2006–2013)
Saddam Hussein died in 30 Decemeber 2006. This was the same year IS became a terrorist organisation. By the US murdering Saddam Hussein they de-stablised Iraq and gave a vacuum for IS to fill.
Islamic State of Iraq (2006–2013) is the section in the Wiki that talks about them.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
You deny the involvement of the west in replacing people like Saddam Hussein and then making IS more relevant?Do you mean western interference into middle eastern countries that have nothing to do with them?
No. I am just sick of repeating myself over and over to someone with the mental capacity of the embryo of a clam.
Making excuses for your cowardice.
Good. But you could have fooled me. You have been spouting shite about everything but the content of the OP for ages now on this thread
I told you what you were not capable of. I don't know you personally so I can't make personal attacks.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
I agreed with it. I agree that " not all muslims back violence" or are even terrorist. What can't you understand?
Then think of a better term. 1.5% of a group is not a fair representation of them. Instead of Muslims call them Islamic fundamentals or militant Muslims or something else.
I simply say as an example that it doesn't need a majority to cause death and destruction and used minority of Nazis of WWII as an example.
The Nazi party were elected. In order to be elected it requires to be voted in or supported. This would mean that they won a majority election in order to get in.
You really are dense aren't you? NO ONE HAS BLAMED "ALL MUSLIMS"
Then call them Islamic fundamentalists or say some Muslims. Muslims with a plural can mean any amount of more than 1 if you don't say how many you are talking about. Since you didn't say how many people can view Muslims in a different way. An Islamaphobe can see that as all Muslims, another can see that only the people who were saying things on social media about Notre Dame,
I have only repeated it to show you who it was that posted it originally .
I read that when he typed it and I didn't see the need for you to use him as your argument. You pretty much quoted Alec and said you agreed with him. That is part of your argument. If it wasn't you wouldn't even mentioned him.
then show us all where I have used it to support my argument. Hurry up! I haven't got all FKN DAY!
Here:
Alec has only suggested that " A considerable portion back the violence". The comment is valid and correct, so stop crying.
It wasn't valid or correct but you agreed with him. In order to have an argument you would have to agree with what you are saying. If it was so correct you or Alec would be able to give numbers of this "considerable" amount that you keep talking about.
No I supported Alec's claim and explained why.
You have pretty much admitted to use what Alec said as part of your argument. In order for an argument to take place you would need a claim which can be supported by an explanation and/or evidence. You used what Alec said as your claims and then said it "is valid and correct,".
None of this has anything to do with the op.
Okay then let me talk about it
of which the West has saved and given refuge to MILLIONS!
They wouldn't be refugees if countries like the US, UK, France, Saudi Arabia were murdering, bombing their countries. Syria, Afghanistan and Yemen are my examples.
You have turned it into a personal argument.
I don't care enough about you to make it personal.
So as far as I am concerned, this is the end of this thread for me.
Coward.
that muslims around the world are celebrating the destruction of the Christian iconic Cathedral Notre Dame
How many 1.5%? This is not a considerable portion nor should they be called by Muslims if they only represent 1.5% of it when there is the majority that is 98.5%.
Created:
You responded to that with this overused BS at post 8;omar 2345 So not all Muslims back violence
My entire quote:
So not all Muslims back violence but we should still have some sort of agenda against all Muslims? Okay.
So why did not include the rest of it? If you said Islam fundamentalists then I wouldn't have a problem but you are saying Muslims as in plural without stating how many you are talking about it. If it is that 1.5% then do use a better category to call someone okay? I don't you even understand 1.5% of anything is a considerable but you may prove to me that you at least know that.
BECAUSE IT ONLY TAKES A MINORITY TO CAUSE MAYHEM AND MURDER on a large scale.
So we should blame the majority for what the minority did?
It won't change the fact that it only takes a few >>> I.E. the MINORITY <<< to cause murder and mayhem on a large scale.]
Nazi Germany weren't a minority back in Germany. They have majority. What are you talking about?
"In 1929, Germany entered a period of severe economic depression and widespread unemployment. The Nazis capitalized on the situation by criticizing the ruling government and began to win elections."
They were elected into power. Meaning they had majority support.
This is what ALEC wrote:Alec A considerable portion back the violence. Even Linda Sarsour, who is American supports Shariah law.Do you see that? ^^^^^^^^^^^^ it is a quote from ALEC not Stephen.
Why did you copy it? It is was part of your argument. It is basically like me saying I brought up history.com quoted the source but then say it was not part of your argument. It is part of your argument and you don't deny it here by doing what you did earlier on. Go to your post #17 when you brought him as your argument then you bring him up again with post #36 then in post #52 you said it was not your point when you are the one bringing it up as your point. If you are not doing so why are you jerking Alec off? Can't he speak for himself or do you need someone to confirm your biased in order for not to be a complete looney? Then in post #54 you still decide to jerk him off and still talk about him.
Wow talk about needing someone else to make your point to you but when you use it as your argument then you say it wasn't your argument? You don't know how to do maths, I assume don't know the difference between and is and ought and I can add doesn't understand when something is inside your argument. That is your argument. Even if I was quoting someone else you have used that as your argument.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
You are showing your ignorance yet again. I shouldn't be surprised. Go back and read post ten, here
This was your message:
World War II fatality statistics vary, with estimates of total deaths ranging from 70 million to 85 million. Deaths directly caused by the war military and civilians killed are estimated at 50-56 million people, there were an additional estimated 19 to 28 million deaths from war-related disease and famine.I put a conservative figure on those deaths at 60 million. So fkn WHAT! Again, You have no point and are simply attempting to creat a argument out of this air.Dispute those figures if you wish. I DON'T CARE!
What is your point? You state before this Islam is the fastest growing population then you brush off your in-ability to do basic maths is with "So fkn WHAT!" then you bring in WW2 fatalities.
Wrong person. I haven't even mentioned that ungrateful bitch Linda Sarsour
Yes wrong person but you did use it as your part of your argument didn't you? I wouldn't have brought it up if you agreed with Alec and stated it with your argument.
Any chance of telling me how 1.5% is considerable?
Created:
-->
@Vader
So is this God all-loving?eternity
idk
How do you know you are going to heaven when you don't even know how many points you need to get into there?
wdym?
I confession my sins in the booth. I say some stuff but don't actually mean it. Is my confession negated?
Created:
-->
@Vader
It is refering to the sinner and hell When you do a sin
How long do you stay in hell?
your rep decreases
What number do you have to be on to go to hell?
Then when you confess, it all goes away
What if I lie?
I'll stick to this one. So any chance of you putting me in the receiver?
Created:
-->
@Vader
How can the new testament be peaceful when God wants to murder people?
Created:
-->
@Vader
No. Nowhere in the bible does it say to fight or draw a sword to someone.
Luke 12:45:47
1Cor 4:21
Gal 5:12
I can bring more but would like to say what you say to these and tell me what version you follow as well so I can link you to the source instead of giving the verse.
Orthodoxy is a peaceful religion
So Orthodoxy follow the Bible without a pope?
Created:
-->
@Vader
Add majority of Muslims since there is a minority that do commit violence. Everything apart from that is correct but do you say the same about Christianity?To be clear, Muslims are PEACEFUL people, the religion itself is violent
Created:
Posted in:
Your topic is bad and you know it is bad when someone's very first forum post is not about the topic at hand.
by omar2345 post 90
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I should add that into the iconic DA quotes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@K_Michael
My stance should be we should accept truth and from that truth use it to support what we value. If we are false about our truth then your values are based on lies.
humanity, social constructs
Humanity creates social constructs so I think the clear example of human activity coming in the way of evolution is genital mutilation. There is no health benefits of doing it yet human activity deems it okay to remove it.
I don't how much people on DA would be. It is best to research it from other sites. I'll name few you can check out:
I found these by simply typing "impact of Darwinism on humanity"
Simply type what I did and read the sites. That should give you more than enough information for what you need it for.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Which is 000.2% higher than what I had it down to be. So fkn WHAT! You have no point and are simply making a argument out of this air.
I expected you to be to use a calculator. If you are not what are you doing here? Maybe I am expecting too much from you.
Dispute those figures if you wish. I DON'T CARE!
What is your point in bringing in WW2? You didn't make that clear.
So not all Muslims back violence.
False. Linda Sarsour is one person and not representation of every single Muslim across the world. For you to make my point "so not all Muslims back violence" is telling how little you understand my point. I didn't use big words. Should I expect you to not understand simply words on-top of not being able to use a calculator?
Now if you want to bore yourself rigid, read what it was that I actually wrote in reply to your silly response; post #10
I have actually and for you to categorise 1.5% of a group when the majority of the 98.5% do not associate with them and still call them by the categorisation is laughable. I don't call a hamburger skeletal muscle when it is more comprised of ham and a bun which together are called hamburger. So why are you saying Muslims as if that makes it easier to understand what they are? Why don't you call them radical Muslims, Islamic fundamentalist or something instead of Muslims when they are only 1.5% of the Muslim population? Surely you can think of a better word to call them then Muslim.
Just 1 half of a % of that number amounts to 75 million muslims. So stop with your "not all muslims" because as Alec has said above at post 7 "A considerable portion [of muslims] back the violence " and a considerable portion do want to kill or convert every Westerner on the planet because their god instruct them to do so.
1.5% is a considerable portion? I am sorry have you heard of the more considerable portion that is 98.5%?
It is like saying the 1.5% of you that is intelligent is a considerable portion when the other 98.5% is st*pid. (Numbers are not accurate so don't cry about me calling you st*pid for not knowing how to use a calculator, might not be able to understand simple words and don't understand the highest percentage is the considerable portion).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Cut the taxes for the rich. Cut social security. Is that what you mean by "brilliant"?I have no "vitriol against " the great and brilliant Donald Trump.
Now, take your time, and show me MY "vitriol against Trump", you buffoon.
I said you don't have the same "vitriol against Trump" and from what said you don't.
Do tell me how Trump is "brilliant".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
"Some people did something,"
This is correct. The intolerable right really show themselves here. A statement reduced to A was done my B is worth crying about? Stephen you really need to try to have this level of vitriol against Trump but sadly you are unaware about the UK being a Monarchy and the Queen being able to declare war so I don't I will get a reasonable approach from you.
Republicans have accused her of downplaying the attacks,
It depends on what they mean by downplay. Who are the Republicans for being the arbiters of truth when they are the party of anti-science? Climate Change with overwhelming evidence they don't take position that humans have a big impact and they've people who believe in Young Earth and deny Evolution only to have as their evidence a book that doesn't prove anything.
terror attacks are now "‘part and parcel’ of living in a big city", - as if we had to simply accept this and get used to it.
Awful comments. What was I supposed to make an excuse of this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
I think working up from the lowest hanging fruit is the best strategy.
That is what I have been doing.
I think you will win the contest so an early congrats on the artificial gold medal.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
I think I am done. I think 2-3 votes were removed so I think I missed out on about 8 debates. Those were the long ones and I would like avoid voting on them if I don't have an interest in what was going on. Spite was not existence in those debates either so I can't use that either. Typically I have a mix of spite and interest for debates. For the ones I didn't vote on I didn't have both. Most of the votes were really easy to vote on so my spite and interest levels does not need to be too high.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
I don't really know why I am but guess I want to for some reason.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Just to make sure. I have 4 days right?
So
I will be tallying up all votes - and I’ll list all points earned by all participants.
Are you doing this currently or after this competition?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Thanks. Not the best time to be entered in the game but since my previous do count. I doubt I would do so badly.I will be tallying up all votes - and I’ll list all points earned by all participants. As I could potentially make a mistake, I’ll ask all participants to double check whether I’ve mossed any of their votes - then declare a winner.
Are you giving out an artificial gold, silver and bronze medal while also giving everyone else the participation award (basically the award of at least you tried)?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
I deleted them for no reason. Okay. Thanks.
Who would be tallying them up when it is over?
When will we get the results of who had what votes?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Can I still join?
Would my previous votes done in the window of this competition count?
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
What's up with post #25?
You already know. I don't want a medal since I want to be in the hall of fame. Both are based on fame and have nothing to do with honor but itself.
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
What do you mean by fame over honor?Just curious...
You want my opinion?
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
Fame over Honor?
?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
You tell me a false number when the process of getting the correct number is easy and now you decide to give me a number without evidence?If it is generally believed there to be over 1 billion muslims in the world then I will not argue with that number. You can for as long as you like.
WWII deaths are estimated between 70 and 85 million, I put a conservative number on that by saying 60 million. Argue that as much as you like too.But it won't alter the fact that it took only a tiny few muslims of the estimated 1.5 billion muslims in the world to bring a city of over 8 million to its knees.
You provided false numbers when it was easy to generate correct numbers and now you are justifying it.
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
I rather be in the hall of fame. If I qualify or whatever it takes to be in it.I didn't intend to tag you, and you replied within 5 seconds. I think you should get a medal for that.
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
I don't understand. What are you saying?The Song is called "Where Were You When the World Stopped Turning"
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
I don't understand.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Still have not told me the number. What are you afraid to give a number of Muslims you dislike?And no one is suggesting "all muslims", Grow up you buffoon., The title is part of the original quote. Stop feeling sorry for yourself and on behalf of others.
Alec has only suggested that " A considerable portion back the violence". The comment is valid and correct, so stop crying.
Do you have any evidence or are you being a yes man?
No one has even suggested "every single muslim", at all, have they?
Then put a number on it.
What has been suggested by Alec is, that " A considerable portion [of muslims] back the violence". I have offered the percentages. You want to ignore that fact so Ok , then fkn ignore that fact. It won't change the fact.
You don't even know maths so why should I take your opinion on numbers seriously? It took my 1 Google search to find out you do know anything about numbers and you are not even able to use a calculator either.
SO stop trying to make this about "ALL MUSLIMS" when it clearly isn't.
How many? Make sure you actually use a calculator this time. That is if you know how to use one.
People can see right through your shite. So go away and come back with a clear and indisputable argument as to why >>>> ISLAM<<<< "is a religion of peace". Or just go away.
Islam is not a Religion of peace. What is this supposed to be a gotcha moment because I just don't see how you did anything apart from showing incapable with numbers and saying what you mean.
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
So you want it to happen?One would hope.
The doctrine in question is called Shariah law
What about it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
Your topic is bad and you know it is bad when someone's very first forum post is not about the topic at hand.If you guys want to debate socialism vs capitalism, you can make a fourm about it. This forum is about hell holes.
Created:
-->
@Snoopy
Do you think I condone that? He made the claim that Muslims a minority has taken New York to its "knees".As per rule of law, no, but its been said that purges happen unchecked in some jurisdictions. All remaining countries with a codified capital punishment for homosexual intercourse are Islamic.
Do you have evidence for this claim you brought up?
Do put me in the receiver so that I can see the message.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
It is what the #1 debater on this site does. He pivots when he doesn't want to acknowledge where he makes mistakes. I can't even think of a single argument we had ever that he never pivoted which equals to I concede because I don't what I am talking about. Sad really if he has #1 on this site and thinks Our_Boat_Is_Right deserves to even be mentioned in the best debater category.Lol great points... i wish he kept going with his Capitalism thing.
Post #4
They are still struggling in the richest nation.
They can't even admit that. Really goes to show how intellectually incapable they are.
the "right" really takes the cake.
Yes war profiteers. Want to build a wall for some reason. Implying stuff like you choose to be poor.
Watch the first minute to get Ben Shapiro implying poor people choose to be poor. That is a really st*pid comment. The list goes on but I that is what came to my mind first.
"While the richer get richer... the poor can buy an iphone so they can at least watch shows when they're begging for money." Freaking most idiotic mentality.
Okay so they can buy an IPhone but still are not able to improve their wages which can help them move out of their bad predicament? Wow I much rather have an IPhone than a decent income. That is a joke by the way.
In answering is socialism bad, capitalism bad thing... They are both horrible without each other. I just don't know which one to call the girl / guy in the relationship.
I think the right argue socialism=bad when they don't realise taxes is a form of redistribution which is socialism. The left I think argue like what Karl Marx did which was neo-liberalism exploited other cultures with unfair trade. This can be clearly seen when people take the music of other cultures but do not credit them or even pay them. Here is a video which does help with understanding what is bad about capitalism or late-stage capitalism.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
The title of this forum post has "Muslim world reacts". How many people are you talking about?No one is suggesting or has suggested that.
It took only a few muslims to bring New York city, a population of 8 million, to its knees.
You are clearly don't know what you are talking about. Do tell me how a minority wins out against a majority.
Not all Germans were Nazis, the majority were peaceful, but it didn't stop the minority causing the deaths of over 60 million men women and children of which 16 million were murdered in death camps. The majority were irrelevant.
So lets say that is true. I am sure you in order for you to be a Nazis there would have to be some sort of action that person committed in order to be one. So you pretty much saying the majority who did not do anything to do Jews don't matter?
There are a estimated 1.5 billion muslims in the world. Just 1 half of a % of that number amounts to 75 million muslims.
Wait what? 1% did what? I don't think you finished your train of thought.
I can basically say there are an estimated 2.2 billion Christians and 1.5% 33 million.
You don't know how to do maths. 1.5% of 1.5 billion is 22.5 million. It is really simple to do. Simply type in Google "1.5% of 1.5billion" then press enter. I can't believe you can't even do that.
Stephen uses the Quran, the Hadith, the Surah and the works of learned Islamic scholars, teachers, historians and Imams - "to paint an entire picture of a Religion".
Are you confused? Where did you bring in the Quran or the Hadith here? Guessing in the comment following.
Quran 8:39And fight them until there is no fitnah and >>>>>[until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah.<<<<<< And if they cease - then indeed,Allah is Seeing of what they do.
If every single Muslim followed this why isn't their constant violence perpetrated by every single Muslim? Do explain that to me.
No. The words of a Muslim preacherExample;Muslim preacher telling the world that killing homosexuals is ISLAMThe "ordinary " moderate muslim believe that it is somehow a act of compassion to kill homsexuals i.e "putting them out of their misery"
Still is an anecdote. I can simply provide you an anecdote of Westboro Baptist Church on homosexuals but I wouldn't say that is a representation of the majority of Christians but you will do that for Islam. I Wonder why.
No. Facts;Example;Islam & Apostasy .Sahih Bukhari (84:57) - [In the words of] "Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"Sahih Bukhari (89:271) - A man who embraces Islam, then reverts to Judaism is to be killed according to "the verdict of Allah and his apostle."
Do tell me about why every single Muslim ain't following this again? I do not know why since you are the "intellectual" on this topic.
Created:
-->
@Alec
A considerable portion back the violence. Even Linda Sarsour, who is American supports Shariah law.
So not all Muslims back violence but we should still have some sort of agenda against all Muslims? Okay.
Shariah law is big government. I don't want that infecting Europe.If the Muslims like Shariah law so much, why can't they go back to their original country? At this time in history, Islam is violent, radical, and incompatible with the west.
So anything bad is big government?
If not then how is giving the government the power to deport people based on Religion not a more big government thing than a small one? You are giving the government power not limiting it.
I know I'm going to go off topic but is your logic the following:-Calling a homosexual a derogatory slur, hate speech that must be banned.-Supporting Shariah law, which kills homosexuals, totally okay, free speech.
Thank you for dodging the question. Even if you answered you would be incorrect because you are missing out on the fundamental Christians who have been in the United States which also dislike homosexuals. How about Jews that follow the old testament? You don't understand that disliking homosexuals is an idea shared by other Religions.The left also advocates for banning hate speech. Should they be deported?
Non-Religious people support secularism should they be deported?
Fundamental Christians support Christian law should they be deported? Westboro Baptist Church come to mind if you don't fundamental Christians exist.
-Women's right to autonomy in general. This includes:-letting them vote-date whomever they want-not whipping them for being out in public without a male relative-counting their testimony equal to that of a man-letting a woman have sexual autonomy. This doesn't mean letting them have abortions, but it means that if a guy wants to have sex with her, the woman has the right to say no, even if that male is her husband. Under shariah law, if your husband wants sex, you have to give him sex. If the guy rapes you, you have to marry him under shariah law.
Guess you didn't dodge it. My questions still apply from above. These problems where here when Islam was never in the west so why are you blaming Islam for backwards ideas when the people in the west also shared similar backward ideas in the past and some still do today?
-Freedom of religion as long as it does not harm others. The Muslims want to harm the Christian population and they would do so once they make up a bigger portion of Europe's population. It's happening in Muslim countries. Hundreds of Churches have been burned in the typical Muslim country.
Evidence?
-More rights for homosexuals. This doesn't mean full blown marriage equality (although I support that) but it does mean that you are not giving gays the death penalty for being gay. No Christian country kills people just for being gay. Many Muslim countries kill people for being gay.
Evidence?
-Separation of Religion and state. Sudan adopted Shariah within it's constitution.
Sudan is a representation of Muslims who are in the west? This is a gross generalisation.
Also, the Muslims are making Paris and London a mess.
What do you mean by "mess" and would like evidence?
As Donald Trump once said, "Paris is no longer Paris". They even had to build a wall around the Effiel Tower to prevent it from getting destroyed by Muslims.
United States was no longer the same United States when it abolished slavery. What is your point.
I could have asked evidence for everything but I am sure you get the picture that you have provided little evidence for your side and thought I would assume everything you said to be true. I have in some cases but in the cases I haven't do find evidence if you can.
Created:
-->
@Alec
They don't assimilate.
Every single Muslim?
If that is the case why isn't every single Muslim committing illegal activity in western countries they have immigrated to?
Those Muslims that posted those comments praising the burning of the Cathedral should be deported to their home country.
So you are for big government? You are for the government removing what people have on the internet in favour of making sure they are being watched by the government and when they say something the government doesn't like they can be deported.
Assiliminated Muslims that don't accept western values should not be in the west.
But they are assimilated so why kick them out for not liking "western values"?
What are western values and is it still western values if everyone in the west doesn't share it?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Stephen uses anecdotes to paint an entire picture of a Religion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Bad argument so I don't see what I am supposed to say to this.But it doesn't.
Add away until you little heart's content You may even be correct. And the rise would be caused by the increase in Islamic terror.
So why aren't you annoyed by right-wing terror instead of focusing on Islam? Do you have evidence of a casual link to the increase in right-wing terror and Islamic terror.
Christianity has given me absolute Zero reasons to fear it whereas Islam has given me hundreds of reasons to fear it.
No, that is your opinion. And I don't give a toss about your opinion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
How was I supposed to understand this without you saying it to be the case?Post # 90 is not referring to my own statement.
Post 92 is likewise in reference to critical thinking
Is this directed to me or you?
Created:
Posted in:
Got another one
All right you've got me. Lets just do the noble thing and walk arm and arm to extinction.
by Titanium (joke by the way) post 225
Created:
Posted in:
I already have which is why I am in the position I am today. I don't to test my beliefs again when I already know it to be correct and a better political stance has not yet arrived for me to test that out with mine.If you don't take the initiative to consider it, there's no guarantee that the world is going to correct you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
What appears to be a strawman?That appears to be a strawman fallacy
So I shouldn't have taken your statement seriously? Why even say it in the first place?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Snoopy
I got to this position by seeing if I was right or wrong. I wasn't a liberal or progressive for my entire life and since I got here due to a standard I apply. I know that I am not being "conned" because conservatives failed to meet the guideline of have a good claim, evidence and explanation.Its a suggestion, to consider, what may or may not be. I'm not saying that thinking absolves my statement of thought
Created:
Posted in:
Created: