| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | '''Liberal logic''' is a term used to describe arguments made by some [[liberal]]s that may appear logical, but are actually nonsensical. Here are some examples: | | '''Liberal logic''' is a term used to describe arguments made by some [[liberal]]s that may appear logical, but are actually nonsensical. Here are some examples: |
| | | | |
| − | # Assuming something is true, merely because another liberal said so (see [[appeal to authority]]) | + | # Assume something is true, merely because a (nearly bankrupt) newspaper said so (see [[appeal to authority]]) |
| − | # Claiming that their viewpoints are being censored, while actually they are the ones censoring their opponents | + | # Claim that liberals' viewpoints are being censored, while actually they are the ones censoring their opponents |
| − | #Insisting that someone needs to experience something (e.g., drugs, pornography, gambling, etc.) before being able to criticize it<ref>[http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1808 Bryn Mawr report on marijuana]. Many commentators said the reporter had no justification for his views since he had never tried marijuana. Examples of such liberal logic included: "There are pros and cons to everything under the sun. That dosen't (sic) mean that you shouldn't try it all...Besides marijuana is so much more beneficial then everyone realizes." which was smartly replied to by another commenter with: "Following your logic, obviously there are PROS to: | + | #Insist that someone needs to experience something (e.g., drugs, pornography, gambling, etc.) before being able to criticize it<ref>[http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1808 Bryn Mawr report on marijuana]. Many commentators said the reporter had no justification for his views since he had never tried marijuana. Examples of such liberal logic included: "There are pros and cons to everything under the sun. That dosen't (sic) mean that you shouldn't try it all...Besides marijuana is so much more beneficial then everyone realizes." which was smartly replied to by another commenter with: "Following your logic, obviously there are PROS to: |
| | *jumping off the Empire State Building | | *jumping off the Empire State Building |
| | *anorexia | | *anorexia |
| Line 11: |
Line 11: |
| | *Shall I keep going?... | | *Shall I keep going?... |
| | Sorry, but not only is your drug-induced logic utterly flawed, but you don't exactly exude intelligence. Forgive me if I don't join your crusade." </ref> | | Sorry, but not only is your drug-induced logic utterly flawed, but you don't exactly exude intelligence. Forgive me if I don't join your crusade." </ref> |
| − | # Personal experience should dictate personal views, rather than rising above bad and/or unusual experiences and basing one's views on real [[logic]] | + | # Pretend to base their opinion on personal experience, which may be atypical, when real [[logic]] would be a better basis |
| | # Claim that switching from heterosexual to [[homosexual]] is customary, but switching back is somehow impossible | | # Claim that switching from heterosexual to [[homosexual]] is customary, but switching back is somehow impossible |
| | # Criticize [[Christians]] for literal interpretations of [[Genesis]], but then insist on even more literal interpretations when it suits the [[liberal]] ideology<ref>For example, [[liberals]] here insist that [[homeschooling]] can only mean being taught while in someone's own home.</ref> | | # Criticize [[Christians]] for literal interpretations of [[Genesis]], but then insist on even more literal interpretations when it suits the [[liberal]] ideology<ref>For example, [[liberals]] here insist that [[homeschooling]] can only mean being taught while in someone's own home.</ref> |
| − | # Insisting that the [[Bible]] literally prohibits judging anything.
| |
| | # No matter what happens in the weather, [[global warming]] caused it | | # No matter what happens in the weather, [[global warming]] caused it |
| | # Belief that a [[correlation]] and/or [[causation]] (e.g., between [[atheism]] and [[suicide]]) can be disproved by a [[counterexample]] (e.g., one [[atheist]] who remained sane) | | # Belief that a [[correlation]] and/or [[causation]] (e.g., between [[atheism]] and [[suicide]]) can be disproved by a [[counterexample]] (e.g., one [[atheist]] who remained sane) |
| Line 24: |
Line 23: |
| | # [[Barack Obama]] on [[Afghanistan]]: with fewer soldiers, we didn't have enough ammo and humvees!<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21text-demdebate.html?sq=transcript&st=nyt&scp=2&pagewanted=print]</ref> | | # [[Barack Obama]] on [[Afghanistan]]: with fewer soldiers, we didn't have enough ammo and humvees!<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21text-demdebate.html?sq=transcript&st=nyt&scp=2&pagewanted=print]</ref> |
| | # [[Free speech]] for anything and everything ... except the [[conservative]] truth, and religion. | | # [[Free speech]] for anything and everything ... except the [[conservative]] truth, and religion. |
| | + | # Insisting that the [[Bible]] literally prohibits judging anything. |
| | # Insisting on "tolerance" for anything that is anti-[[Christian]], while promoting censorship for anything which is [[Christian]]. | | # Insisting on "tolerance" for anything that is anti-[[Christian]], while promoting censorship for anything which is [[Christian]]. |
| | # [[Hollywood]] promotion of [[abortion]] is welcomed, but views of Hollywood actresses towards their own children are concealed | | # [[Hollywood]] promotion of [[abortion]] is welcomed, but views of Hollywood actresses towards their own children are concealed |