• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Duck Dynasty': A&E warned Phil Robertson about speaking out too much [W:1111]

Status
Not open for further replies.
FACTS:

no content in MY conversation was ignored, if you disagree post factual proof
no assumption were made by ME, if you disagree post factual proof

your two statements are wrong.
"Stating they are sins, is not making a comparison."
"and you would also be wrong if you are asserting that he equated the two behaviors"

PROOF:


Comparison
: the act of suggesting that two or more things are similar or in the same category
Comparison - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he put them all in the same category thus factually comparing them

: to treat, represent, or regard as equal, equivalent, or comparable
Equate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he did treat them, represent them and regard them as comparable sins

Facts, links and definitions destroy your two statements and prove them wrong, as always, I ASK AGAIN, if you disagree simply post any facts you have that prove otherwise and simply quote me making the assumptions made up
Really? Another post devoid of [highlight]the[/highlight] relevant facts?

Do you really not understand that context and meaning of what was said is everything here?
And that the constant ignoring of that makes your postings wrong each and every time


So again.
Fact: You were already told that they both being sins was not the comparison being discussed or the alleged comparison that has folks in an uproar.
You assumed and were wrong because of the assumption
He did not equate homosexuality to bestiality. Saying so is a lie. He made no such comparison.
He said they were sins. That is all.
 
A & E warned him and then A & E Caves.

As it turns out, taking the side of the fringe minority was the wrong decsiion all along.

A&E caves for using shows in the can they already paid for ?
 
If they are going to use it I would suspect so

Of course they plan on using episodes with him in it, they support his beliefs enough to do absolutely nothing about him being in the show. They suspended him and are spamming the show still, and promoting next season.
 
Really? Another post devoid of [highlight]the[/highlight] relevant facts?

Do you really not understand that context and meaning of what was said is everything here?
And that the constant ignoring of that makes your postings wrong each and every time


So again.
Fact: You were already told that they both being sins was not the comparison being discussed or the alleged comparison that has folks in an uproar.
You assumed and were wrong because of the assumption
He did not equate homosexuality to bestiality. Saying so is a lie. He made no such comparison.
He said they were sins. That is all.

FACTS:[/B]

no content in MY conversation was ignored, if you disagree post factual proof
no assumption were made by ME, if you disagree post factual proof

your two statements are wrong.
"Stating they are sins, is not making a comparison."
"and you would also be wrong if you are asserting that he equated the two behaviors"

PROOF:


Comparison
: the act of suggesting that two or more things are similar or in the same category
Comparison - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he put them all in the same category thus factually comparing them

: to treat, represent, or regard as equal, equivalent, or comparable
Equate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he did treat them, represent them and regard them as comparable sins

Facts, links and definitions destroy your two statements and prove them wrong, as always, I ASK AGAIN, if you disagree simply post any facts you have that prove otherwise and simply quote me making the assumptions made up
 
Just not in the way you argued.
i made no argument i pointed out a fact and it was EXACTLY the way i stated it, the defintions of the words proof that. if you disagree please simply quote me posting in a way different from the definition.

SHould be a simply task right?
 
FACTS:

no content in MY conversation was ignored, if you disagree post factual proof
no assumption were made by ME, if you disagree post factual proof

your two statements are wrong.
"Stating they are sins, is not making a comparison."
"and you would also be wrong if you are asserting that he equated the two behaviors"

PROOF:


Comparison
: the act of suggesting that two or more things are similar or in the same category
Comparison - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he put them all in the same category thus factually comparing them

: to treat, represent, or regard as equal, equivalent, or comparable
Equate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he did treat them, represent them and regard them as comparable sins

Facts, links and definitions destroy your two statements and prove them wrong, as always, I ASK AGAIN, if you disagree simply post any facts you have that prove otherwise and simply quote me making the assumptions made up
Again? Really?
Do you really not understand that context and meaning of what was said is everything here?
And that the constant ignoring of that makes your postings wrong each and every time

Your post is devoid of relevant facts. Period!


So again.
Fact: You were already told that they both being sins was not the comparison being discussed or the alleged comparison that has folks in an uproar.
You assumed and were wrong because of the assumption
He did not equate homosexuality to bestiality. Saying so is a lie. He made no such comparison.
He said they were sins. That is all.
 
i made no argument i pointed out a fact and it was EXACTLY the way i stated it, the defintions of the words proof that. if you disagree please simply quote me posting in a way different from the definition.

Semantics is fun. You are wrong, and right for the wrong reasons, at the same time.
 
Again? Really?
Do you really not understand that context and meaning of what was said is everything here?
And that the constant ignoring of that makes your postings wrong each and every time

Your post is devoid of relevant facts. Period!


So again.
Fact: You were already told that they both being sins was not the comparison being discussed or the alleged comparison that has folks in an uproar.
You assumed and were wrong because of the assumption
He did not equate homosexuality to bestiality. Saying so is a lie. He made no such comparison.
He said they were sins. That is all.

FACTS:

no content in MY conversation was ignored, if you disagree post factual proof
no assumption were made by ME, if you disagree post factual proof

your two statements are wrong.
"Stating they are sins, is not making a comparison."
"and you would also be wrong if you are asserting that he equated the two behaviors"

PROOF:


Comparison
: the act of suggesting that two or more things are similar or in the same category
Comparison - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he put them all in the same category thus factually comparing them

: to treat, represent, or regard as equal, equivalent, or comparable
Equate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he did treat them, represent them and regard them as comparable sins

Facts, links and definitions destroy your two statements and prove them wrong, as always, I ASK AGAIN, if you disagree simply post any facts you have that prove otherwise and simply quote me making the assumptions made up
 
Semantics is fun. You are wrong, and right for the wrong reasons, at the same time.

translation: you have nothing to back up your false claims. I played ZERO semantics i stated facts if you disagree AGAIN simply point them out and quote me and factually show me the semantics. Your assumptions fail you.
 
Irrelevant information ....

Do you really not understand that context and meaning of what was said is everything here?
And that the constant ignoring of that makes your postings wrong each and every time?

Fact: You were already told that they both being sins was not the comparison being discussed or the alleged comparison that has folks in an uproar.
You assumed and were wrong because of the assumption
He did not equate homosexuality to bestiality. Saying so is a lie. He made no such comparison.
He said they were sins. That is all.
 
whoops, just saw the thread ban warning so rephrasing this

Excon, Mason, a lot of us read the comments differently from you; and I doubt we'll convince you anymore than you will convince us.
 
translation: you have nothing to back up your false claims. I played ZERO semantics i stated facts if you disagree AGAIN simply point them out and quote me and factually show me the semantics. Your assumptions fail you.

You can compare sins to sins by claiming they are sins (which is what happened). Or you can pretend to compare bestiality to homosexuality by saying they are both sins (right for the wrong reasons).
 
1.)You can compare sins to sins by claiming they are sins (which is what happened).
2.) Or you can pretend to compare bestiality to homosexuality by saying they are both sins (right for the wrong reasons).


so you dont have anything to back up your claims?
1.) 100% correct hence it is factually a comparison, no semantics there
2.) this is the same thing as one, hence again factually comparison

like i said you made the same mistake the other poster di YOU assumed i meant somethign else when in fact i simply used the definition of the word making my statement 1005 true and accurate and his two statments 1005 factually wrong

thank you for proving my point and please let me know when you have any facts that change this
 
Do you really not understand that context and meaning of what was said is everything here?
And that the constant ignoring of that makes your postings wrong each and every time?

Fact: You were already told that they both being sins was not the comparison being discussed or the alleged comparison that has folks in an uproar.
You assumed and were wrong because of the assumption
He did not equate homosexuality to bestiality. Saying so is a lie. He made no such comparison.
He said they were sins. That is all.


FACTS:

no content in MY conversation was ignored, if you disagree post factual proof
no assumption were made by ME, if you disagree post factual proof

your two statements are wrong.
"Stating they are sins, is not making a comparison."
"and you would also be wrong if you are asserting that he equated the two behaviors"

PROOF:


Comparison
: the act of suggesting that two or more things are similar ]or in the same category
Comparison - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he put them all in the same category thus factually comparing them

: to treat, represent, or regard as equal, equivalent, or comparable
Equate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

he did treat them, represent them and regard them as comparable sins

Facts, links and definitions destroy your two statements and prove them wrong, as always, I ASK AGAIN, if you disagree simply post any facts you have that prove otherwise and simply quote me making the assumptions made up

one shred of factual evidence you cant do it
 
so you dont have anything to back up your claims?
100% correct hence it is factually a comparison, no semantics there.

Right for the wrong reasons (semantics), or wrong. You can pick.
 
Do you really not understand that context and meaning of what was said is everything here?
And that the constant ignoring of that makes your postings wrong each and every time?

Fact: You were already told that they both being sins was not the comparison being discussed or the alleged comparison that has folks in an uproar.
You assumed and were wrong because of the assumption
He did not equate homosexuality to bestiality. Saying so is a lie. He made no such comparison.
He said they were sins. That is all.

 
Right for the wrong reasons (semantics), or wrong. You can pick.

there was ZERO semantics in my statement, its factually accurate and again feel free to provide facts, links and definitions to prove otherwise. Until then you are simply wrong and have nothing. Let me knwo when you can do this

simply questions

did he make a comparison between bestiality and homosexuality? yes or no
did he equate homosexuality and bestiality? yes or no


there is zero other written content except for what is present anything else will be an assumption on your part so the questions and answers are easy as there is only one factual way to answer them.
yes or no?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom