121
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 20:
Line 20: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
{{userboxbottom}}
{{userboxbottom}}
==A Response to "[[Liberal logic]]"==
1. No one needs to experience something before criticizing it. Heck, I criticize that whole speaking in tongues deal, and I can assuredly say that I have never spoken in tongues (beyond my own will)
2. I can say this only, logic stems from personal experience.
3. I don't want censorship of [[intelligent design]], I just don't want it being taught in a public school's science courses. As for the silence from ID people, I haven't seen it, they seen to be very vocal in their attempts to place it in schools' curriculum.
4. I don't think people switch in the first place (people are going to be gay, once they find out about relationships, they will know their sexual preference), but I guess someone could go from claiming to be homosexual to claiming to be heterosexual.
5. I'm assuming that it is referring to the Bible, I would never, ever use a work of fiction to back up my claims. The only exception I might consider is if I was talking to a Christian I might use some of it's pieces against their argument (fight fire with fire).
6. No. Just no. Global warming only causes warming and in some circumstances really out of the ordinary weather phenomenon.
7. Isn't that what this whole response is about? Anyways in mathematical logic the if/then statement is true when both statments are false, the conclusion is true when the condition is false, or if both staments are true. The only time the if/then is false is when the conditional is true and the conclusion is false, and when the entire statement is false, it cannot be applied.
8. This just doesnt make sense...but I like it.
9. Liberal behavior? I really wish I knew what that was.
10. Well, Bill Clinton's misconduct can be forgotten about now as he is no longer in an office, but Ted Kennedy's behavior should be looked at. Although I really think people should vote on the issues with only a small consideration of action. Some actions though should be looked at more, particularly ones that show characteristics that would affect the ability to govern.
11. Perfectly valid question. For example if I asked "If a study showed that marjiuana used stopped all cancer growth, would you legalize it?". Questions like this show how radical a person is (i.e if they said no the previous question I might question their reasonability).
12. Have no idea.
13. Everyone has free speech, conservatives, liberals, nazis, feminists. As long as its not excessively obscene.
14. Once again there is confusion between "censorship" and "separation of church and state". If Christians want to organize a pro-ID parade go ahead, but ID should not be in science classes.
15. Let me put this forward. Celebrities are morally and culturally isloated people. They usually have terrible morals, have no idea what its like to live like real people and their children will either be the most deplorable celebrity type, or reject all of that and move on.
16. The whole abortion-breast cancer thing never seems adequetly presented to me. I have seen studies to support it but too many against it.
17. Impoverished people generally will not become dependant because the money handed to them is not enough to support any reasonable lifestyle, and most of the people in those situations want better ones and will at least attempt to work for it.
18. (WORK IN PROGRESS)
==A List? Lets==
==A List? Lets==