• 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!

U.S. Considering Refugee Status for Hondurans

Or, you know, we could just stop killing babies in the womb...

Make further incentives to adopt rather than abort.

You might want to take that up with some of the Ladies here in the forum. ;)
 
Is that a bus stop taking them from San Pedro Sula to Trujillo?

I don't recall hearing anything about them being predisposed to laziness, that's racist... they'll go the whole 6 ft...;)

You are just so good to children. :)
 
You might want to take that up with some of the Ladies here in the forum. ;)

I've never had a problem talking to the ladies...;)

You are just so good to children. :)

Of course, everything we do is suppose to be for the children...:D
 
i don't need to prove a bias source as fact that is up to the source not to be bias.
if you don't actually respond to the on-topic discussion of this thread i will take it that you have no argument to present and will have just lost
this discussion.
My argument is identical to that in the article, which you refuse to address. Calling it biased and using that label as a reason to ignore it is a genetic fallacy, plain and simple. I accept your use of the genetic fallacy and nothing else as a concession. Good bye :peace
 
Really? You post a link to a well known highly biased website, and when it was rejected, questioned the rejection by claiming the content was good. Previously I presented quotes reported on websites you rejected because you claimed they were highly biased.

That's a total flip flop of standards. That makes your position and application of fact completely hypocritical.
Not at all. Nobody said what was wrong about the article or questioned any of the facts specifically and offered counter evidence to why they are not really facts at all. Any time I question a source, I point out what I find hard to believe, point out that I cannot find the main source of that information, and give an alternative source that seems to tell a different story. None of that was done here--neither you, ludin, nor clownboy addressed the argument in the article or pointed out what was wrong with it/what specific facts were incorrect.

Justify it all you want, but that is a clear genetic fallacy. I've already given up on the other two. You have one more chance to tell me what is wrong with the article specifically and why, and provide evidence that counters it. Until then, you have conceded the debate and this discussion is over.
 
Not at all. Nobody said what was wrong about the article or questioned any of the facts specifically and offered counter evidence to why they are not really facts at all. Any time I question a source, I point out what I find hard to believe, point out that I cannot find the main source of that information, and give an alternative source that seems to tell a different story. None of that was done here--neither you, ludin, nor clownboy addressed the argument in the article or pointed out what was wrong with it/what specific facts were incorrect.

Justify it all you want, but that is a clear genetic fallacy. I've already given up on the other two. You have one more chance to tell me what is wrong with the article specifically and why, and provide evidence that counters it. Until then, you have conceded the debate and this discussion is over.

I see. So you think declaring yourself a winner means something? LOL. Okie dokie, whatever it takes to feel important.
 
My argument is identical to that in the article, which you refuse to address. Calling it biased and using that label as a reason to ignore it is a genetic fallacy, plain and simple. I accept your use of the genetic fallacy and nothing else as a concession. Good bye :peace

thank your for poving you don't have an argument you lose bye you concession is noted.
 
I see. So you think declaring yourself a winner means something? LOL. Okie dokie, whatever it takes to feel important.

he has no argument so he can't win. he can just claim his own fallacy. the fact is that the huffpo has a know bias in any report that it does. it is a well known fact that the huffpo is a liberal spin machine. in an argument type of situation the source of the argument matters. if the source used is a well known bias and cannot be trusted as a source of information there is no need for a counter argument.
 
he has no argument so he can't win. he can just claim his own fallacy. the fact is that the huffpo has a know bias in any report that it does. it is a well known fact that the huffpo is a liberal spin machine. in an argument type of situation the source of the argument matters. if the source used is a well known bias and cannot be trusted as a source of information there is no need for a counter argument.

True. On the other hand, it's interesting to see how long the bubbles take to surface once someone has sunk into the mud.
 
Back
Top Bottom