So, I just got back from visiting my local Mosque...
- Thread starter NoleSoup4U
- Start date
It was inevitable. Really the only remaining retarded thing you could do here.I'd be happy to help you out with that.
I don't know. I could possibly get canonized for this self-less act.
You don't need the pills, buddy.
And now you guys are back to using statistics as a reason to infringe on someone's liberties. What would you say to someone who used that argument as part of a pro-death penalty argument?
That's the beautiful thing about logic, you could take a thousand years and you will never be able to overcome the lack of reason you have finally exposed. It's over. Turns out all you needed was to sleep on it.
The stats are irrelevant. In the elevator #2 there is also a very small percent chance he kills you, which is why it's not justified to kill him. If it was very likely that he was going to kill you, like if he pointed a gun at you, killing him would be justified. That would be similar to having an abortion IF the life of the mother is in danger.You don't need the pills, buddy.
And now you guys are back to using statistics as a reason to infringe on someone's liberties. What would you say to someone who used that argument as part of a pro-death penalty argument?
We can easily remove stats and the logic is the same.
1) You get an abortion and kill the baby.
2) You don't and die of complications.
3) You decide to not kill the baby and you both live. Nobody infringes on anybody's liberties.
It's over. You lose.
I'll have to admit, Nole produces some of the best threads. It's not troll work, it's genuine. I was surprised he found an unlikely and rare ally.
Continue.
Continue.
You're right. Using stats is irrelevant.
BTW, you're changing the argument. You can't rebut someone's argument by changing it before you rebut it.
There's a few of us like-minded individuals. Unfortunately Elon Musk isn't one of them.
There's a few of us like-minded individuals. Unfortunately Elon Musk isn't one of them.
I thought you could disagree on some things and understand their positions and you can still be a like-minded individual?
You attempted to create parallel scenarios to prove your position and claimed there was no 3rd option. I pointed out there is, and showed you, using your own parallel scenario.
I even fixed it at your request so that there is no dispute about the details of the argument. This is a pretty sad attempt at wiggling out of being proven dead wrong, but it's not going to work. You asked that I don't use stats, so I obliged. I did not change the argument, just removed the stat because it's not needed.
There is no answer to this, and by not refuting it you are admitting defeat.
1) You get an abortion and kill the baby.
2) You don't and die of complications.
3) You decide to not kill the baby and you both live. Nobody infringes on anybody's liberties.
You lose.
Didn't read this thread. Saw the title, saw it was 11 pages. Assumed legendary status . In.
Oh, I understand Elon's position. He was trying to subsidize his losses. It's brilliant if you can con someone into allowing it.
No, you're not getting it. You're changing the discussion from liberties being infringed upon to possible outcomes of the decision. This reason is why I told BA that his example fell short.
Of course you 'understand.' There's likely no topic that you couldn't conclude on in a moment on gut feel.
Wrong. You tried to say the scenarios weren't parallel because there was no 3rd option. There clearly is, as I've pointed out and the 2 scenarios are logically parallel.
It's fun watching you flounder, but there is nothing you can do to change this fact. You lose.
So you are admitting it is a baby and not just a clump of cells. You prolife or prochoice?
They aren't parallel and there wasn't a third option. You changed the subject.
Look, all I did was break the whole thing completely down. That doesn't change the overlying message that the story given wasn't the same as the subject being discussed.
This reflects Nole's position that whatever it is has a right to life. I assumed that meant he thinks it's a baby, but we can use whatever term you want, it doesn't change anything. I'm pro-choice.
I defend everyone's right to choose how they breakdown issues to come up with their own solution. I wish we had more people that thought independently of the garbage that is fed to us by our pols and MSM.
One of my biggest beefs and why I was defending Nole is that he at least has the guts to let people know what his position is and defend it while his attackers rarely do so for themselves. Its like a mob mentality breaks out for some and instead of looking at things through the lens of the other person they just gather up their pitchforks.
Don't get me wrong, I like when people get called out in a funny throat cutting way but there was no funny here and Noles ultimate position of being pro-choice is a good one IMO. I am happy he came to that conclusion but if he didn't it isn't a big deal either.
There is a 3rd option. You were dead wrong when you proposed there wasn't. When you broke it down, you made the mistake of not acknowledging the 3rd, which makes them parallels as I have repeatedly laid them out for you. Don't worry, I'm not expecting you to refute the logic because it can't be done, as it is sound reason.
I also don't expect you to admit defeat as it seems you are incapable of doing so. We're just wondering how many more embarassing attempts you'll make at wiggling out of it. The over/under is 9. I took the under. You'll say something cocky but dumb and jump ship soon.
1) You get an abortion and kill the fetus.
2) You don't and die of complications.
3) You decide to not kill the fetus and you both live. Nobody infringes on anybody's liberties.
You lose.
There is no debate here other than Nole's insistence that the mother and fetus have an equal right to life. Natch pointed out the problem with this, Nole dug in, and here we are. That's the internet. No matter how we got here, Nole's logic has been proven to be flawed, which was the entire point of the discussion. He was right in not getting specific for so long, we knew it was flawed. He finally took a chance and exposed himself. There is no undoing that.
Buddy, this isn't what we were discussing. We were discussing the liberties of the mother vs. the liberties of the fetus. We weren't discussing the possible outcomes of a situation.
Le me break down what has happened to this point:
- We're arguing about the illness, which is the mother's liberties vs. the fetus' liberties.
- BA brings up a scenario trying to compare the illness to what would essentially be the symptoms of the illness
- I tell him why this isn't a good analogy
- You come on here and instead of trying to prove what BA's story has to do with the original discussion, you change the original discussion to fit BA's story.
That's fine and dandy to defend that right, are you against the right to poke holes in the logic of that persons breakdown of the issue at hand? That's what has been happening.
Sure but with all the name calling going on last night I am not sure that "poking holes" was all that was going on. I got called Prime for christs sake.
No need to rehash this, but the company's are not 'his' he likely isn't even involved on many of the trivial deals. Many of the deals are deals that tons of company's pursue when choosing where to do business and would be pursued if they were rich in profit or experiencing losses.
The irony is, in this very thread you accused people of simplifying complex issues.
Nat doesn't understand the problem. This is because Nat can't wrap his head around said problem. To him, only one side can have liberties, and that's whatever side you choose to support. He can't even fathom that both sides might have liberties, and that is what is leading to the issues.
Funny, I thought getting taxpayer help was a pretty straightforward issue. Either you got it or you didn't. I didn't realize how truly complicated it was.
Of course you didn't. The things you don't realize or understand are constantly pointed out, and your responses are generally what make these threads long and great. This is one of the rare times, you admit you don't realize something.
Latest posts
-
Source Confirms to Rivals, Iowa has been in Contact with General Booty- Latest: swagsurfer02
-
-
-
