Difference between revisions of "Liberal logic"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by Benaud (Talk); changed back to last version by Fox)
(If it's nonsensical, it's not logical.)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Liberal logic''' is an argument that has logical appeal to a [[liberal]], but is nonsensical.  Let's build a list:
+
'''Liberal logic''' is an argument that has emotional appeal to a [[liberal]], but is nonsensical.  Let's build a list:
  
 
* belief that a [[correlation]] (e.g., between atheism and suicide) can be disproved by a poor [[counterexample]] (e.g., one atheist who remained sane)
 
* belief that a [[correlation]] (e.g., between atheism and suicide) can be disproved by a poor [[counterexample]] (e.g., one atheist who remained sane)

Revision as of 22:54, February 16, 2008

Liberal logic is an argument that has emotional appeal to a liberal, but is nonsensical. Let's build a list:

  • belief that a correlation (e.g., between atheism and suicide) can be disproved by a poor counterexample (e.g., one atheist who remained sane)
  • 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)
  • insisting on "tolerance" for anything that is anti-Christian, and censorship for anything is Christian
  • 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)

See also