On 7/7/2011 7:47 PM, Sam wrote: > > Wow dude, I thought you were one of the reasonable ones.
I am pretty reasonable, or I like to think so .. hope so. I wasn't speaking about this particular conversation, more commenting on a pattern I have noticed over the years. Thanks for the summary, though. > So he's hating on all female Republicans because they're > fundamentalists which in his view means they actually have faith. See, this is what I am talking about. That's a bit of a leap in logic. I don't recall him saying any such thing. If > they went to church but thought most of what was said was BS he might > vote for them. Now it's clear from the start he was against Bachmann > because she's a Republican and therefore must be a fundamentalist. Nnnnnno this isn't clear at all. Again, you have some interesting ways of connecting A to B. > When question he looked it up and came back with a big aha because he > suprised himself. > > So the straw man really is claiming she's a fundy while she isn't. So > he than had to cover is error by changing his defininition of a fundy > to mean anyone that isn't a moderate. Fair enough. > > Now to claim that since she believes in a higher being she's too > stupid to run the country is what I was trying to draw out and it came > too easy. Actually, I believe what he was saying is that her fundamentalist leaning beliefs, which he finds utterly absurd in themselves, make her a poor choice for leader of a nation. Now, spin that however you want it. > So I'm thinking you weren't paying attention if you think I was using > the straw man. Everything I claimed from the begining came to be true > bigotry he was trying to disguise as intelligence. Well, I wouldn't want to be accused of bigotry either, so let me make my stance clear from the start. I can not fathom people beleiving in a literal interpretation of the Bible. I just don't see how anyone could. She has chosen to base at least part of her life around a book of stories that is supposed to be the word of God, but was written by man and then edited by committee to remove the parts they didn't like. So, I am allowed to question her decision making abilities. It has nothing to do with Republicans or Democrats or the faithful or women. I don't agree with some of her beliefs and opinions and desired policies, so I would choose not to vote for her. This is not at all unreasonable. I believe that is the gist of the original argument too, before all of the spinning and logic-leaping happened. > It's basic drill down, he says something offensive and I keep asking > qestions until he realizes his bias. Everyone does it to me all the > time, only with less satisfying results. Because you usually don't answer the questions, opting instead for those glib one-liners ;) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:340048 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
