Difference between revisions of "Liberal logic"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(added another "see also") |
m (I think this is what you meant) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
* increasing spending by government must reduce poverty (no, dependency increases poverty) | * increasing spending by government must reduce poverty (no, dependency increases poverty) | ||
* teaching abstinence-only does not reduce premarital sex | * teaching abstinence-only does not reduce premarital sex | ||
| − | * widespread ownership of | + | * widespread ownership of guns, largely defensive weapons, must not reduce crime |
* that new laws reducing the gun ownership rate by 0.1% and a subsequent election of a left wing government are not linked | * that new laws reducing the gun ownership rate by 0.1% and a subsequent election of a left wing government are not linked | ||
* that lack of government programs to rehabilitate criminals must not reduce crime | * that lack of government programs to rehabilitate criminals must not reduce crime | ||
Revision as of 02:49, February 16, 2008
Liberal logic is an argument that has logical appeal to a liberal, but is nonsensical. Let's build a list:
- free speech for anything and everything ... except the conservative truth
- an atheistic culture cannot harm anyone, but saying a prayer in class can cause tremendous harm
- increasing spending by government must reduce poverty (no, dependency increases poverty)
- teaching abstinence-only does not reduce premarital sex
- widespread ownership of guns, largely defensive weapons, must not reduce crime
- that new laws reducing the gun ownership rate by 0.1% and a subsequent election of a left wing government are not linked
- that lack of government programs to rehabilitate criminals must not reduce crime
- that increasing taxes must increase government revenue (no, often people work less)
(add to list)