• 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!

'We hate the United States': Secessionists rally in Texas

Now, THAT'S a great post! This is debate!!! You make very good points -- I wish the dicusssion were like this 20 pages ago.

You:
1) actually identify an argument (three premises to support a conclusion)
2) counter each premise (note the premises don't have to be established facts!!!)
3) arrive at reasonable conclusion

I don't know what to tell you, but this is essentially what people have been saying since you made your original statement. I don't know why the light bulb suddenly went on for you. :doh
 
I don't know what to tell you, but this is essentially what people have been saying since you made your original statement. I don't know why the light bulb suddenly went on for you. :doh

Maybe she needs LONG sentences. I think she's still stuck in 5-paragraph theme land.
 
I know it's hard to admit when you're wrong, hon -- but I know next time you try to pull that crap you'll do your homework.

What homework? You made an idiotic post and people called you on it and instead of admitting that you were wrong in making said statements you opted to desperately try and dig yourself out of the hole you put yourself in and then resorted to childish insults. Plus, the fact that you think you actually schooled some people here is even more of a joke. :rofl
 
What homework?
The next time Catz tries to call me on a logical fallacy, she'll try extra hard to get it right, depending on whether she's the type to hold a grudge and try to vindicate herself. Time will tell.

Given that she's treating a single premise as a full blown argument by making up premises based on poor reasoning skills, I'd say she has a long way to go.

Since you seem to agree with her reasoning, you're on the same boat.
 
The next time Catz tries to call me on a logical fallacy, she'll try extra hard to get it right, depending on whether she's the type to hold a grudge and try to vindicate herself. Time will tell.

Yes, you've totally set yourself up here as someone to impress. ^.^

Were you trying to lower expectations right out of the gate so you could come along later and wow us?
 
You'll note I've taken her out of the debate, she's reduced herself to silly one-liners.
 
You'll note I've taken her out of the debate, she's reduced herself to silly one-liners.

Hello irony. :doh

You and TD should talk. You'd have a lot in common.
 
Yes, you've totally set yourself up here as someone to impress. ^.^

Were you trying to lower expectations right out of the gate so you could come along later and wow us?
I actually prefer nice light-hearted discussion, but have no problem extending the claws when the need arises.

I believe I responded to your fallacy twice and tried to give you a way out, but you kept pressing it, saying I was embarrassing myself. Kind of ironic.
 
Last edited:
Now, THAT'S a great post! This is debate!!! You make very good points -- I wish the dicusssion were like this 20 pages ago.

I have been trying to have this discussion all along. How many times have I tried to draw your attention back to this point?
 
Last edited:
I have been trying to have this discussion all along. How many times have I tried to draw your attention back to this point?
I believe you earlier took the position that my points were not facts and therefore not valid. It started the whole side debate on facts/opinions. I still don't agree with that view -- a logical argument doesn't require factual premises. People are perfectly capable of reasoning from liklihoods.

In that last post you considered each of my premises and countered with a premise of your own.
 
I believe you earlier took the position that my points were not facts and therefore not valid. It started the whole side debate on facts/opinions. I still don't agree with that view -- a logical argument doesn't require factual premises. People are perfectly capable of reasoning from liklihoods.

In that last post you considered each of my premises and countered with a premise of your own.

You misunderstood my argument, which was that you stated your opinion as if it was fact, and then where unable to support your initial assertion.
 
This "fight" between Taylor and everybody else takes me back to the golden days of yore, when Taylor, as the Black Knight, went up against King Arthur. :mrgreen:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno"]YouTube - Monty Python And The Holy Grail- The Black Knight[/ame]
 
Last edited:
You misunderstood my argument, which was that you stated your opinion as if it was fact, and then where unable to support your initial assertion.
We could rehash that whole discussion, but I think it best we wrap this one up and start elsewhere? Though I'm happy to discuss if you really want to.;)
 
This "fight" between Taylor and everybody else takes me back to the golden days of yore, when Taylor, as the Black Knight, went up against King Arthur. :mrgreen:
But I DO always win! :2razz:

I never understood why ppl like that movie so much, I guess I just have a different sense of humor. I once knew some guys that would laugh at the knights who say knee? I did like the part where they were attacked by the bunny!
 
But I DO always win! :2razz:

I never understood why ppl like that movie so much, I guess I just have a different sense of humor. I once knew some guys that would laugh at the knights who say knee? I did like the part where they were attacked by the bunny!

That's what the Black Knight thought too. LOL.
 
I think the MODS need to take a look at a thread where numerous members have turned it into a dog pile on a single member rather than debate the issues.

This thread is basement material in my opinion.

:2wave:
 
I don't think Redress realizes that I could care less what ideology people hold, when they're wrong they're wrong.

Actually, the correct term to reflect your intended attitude is "COULDN'T" care less".

If you were only to apply a little simple logic to the saying, you would realize that if you COULD care less, you obviously do care, since you have left so much room there to indicate a lower level of caring.
 
Back
Top Bottom