Felicity

Stop talkin' so sweet to me brother....

__________________
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
While I thought that I was learning how to live, I have been learning how to die. ~*Leonardo Da Vinci*~

Felicity

Oh Jerry... you are a knight in shining armor! This is good--you are a very capable debater and now I can watch the logic sparring without the guilt. I don't promise not to root for 1069 (did ya ever think you'd see that in print!?)

Jerry

Actually, this should prove to be quite a challenge for me, as I have only discussed it in passing with likeminded folks back in the day when I held the Pro-Abortion position, and I have not had a chance in a debate forum to go against it.....as a result I am a bit muddied as to what it's exact strengths and weaknesses are.....should be fun!

__________________
Palin/Miller 2012!

Felicity

I have faith that you'll do fine...it's the consistancy of the logic of the pro-choice side that I think may fail you.

tecoyah

Then what point would there be....in you playing this game of reverse debate...on this topic? You will gain nothing from the experiment, and are destined to commit the self same deception of thought ,you worry others will make. You will lose the debate because you do not wish to win...and you seem uninterested in the education intended by the concept.

I doubt anyone will accept your challenge....though I did consider it.

__________________
Self-Banned

Felicity

Assume what you like--I was pro-choice at one point in my life.

I never "challenged"--I was "challenged." And my desire to "win" a debate is not exceeded by my committment to truth. Yes, I could suspend truth for the purpose of debate, but it does seem pointless as you say to try to win at the cost of intellectual honesty. Some people have no problem with being dishonest, tecoyah. I do.

Lachean

Reverse debates are about understanding, not winning.

Dont you find it quite presumptuous to equate suspending your point of view with suspending truth?

__________________
"Truth, in the matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived." - Oscar Wilde

1069

One of the points of reverse debate, Felcity, is to see which arguments would work on your ideological adversaries.
The ones they would use in reverse debate are probably going to be the ones they personally find most convincing and persuasive.
It could be that you (or I) have been entirely off-track with the approach we've been using all along, and just never realized it.
I wouldn't expect Jerry to debate me by screaming "MY BODY MY CHOICE!" over and over again. This is a prochoice argument that pretty much falls upon deaf ears, one that prochoicers are reduced to when they become frustrated because nothing else is working.
Same with "ABORTION IS CHILD MURDER! BABY-KILLER! BABY-KILLER!"
I don't think any prolifer really expects that to convince or persuade anyone. It's a sort of tantrum that they are reduced to throwing when nothing else works.
Maybe this reverse debate will give us a window into the minds and psyches of our opponents, and see what does work, what could persuade them.
Although, realistically, I think this rationale would work better with other issues; abortion is such an emotional issue that people, once their minds are made up, are very rarely persuaded to change their opinions.
Mostly, I think both sides are trying to win over the moderates, centrists, and fence-sitters, rather than trying to convert each other, which is basically a lost cause.

__________________
"I do love this idea that one can scream and scream and scream, with that utopia just one more scream away."
~ Scucca

Felicity

I agree. That's why it would be pointless. I have already debated the other side when I believed it. I found it illogical and subjective-hence, I am now pro-life. I used to be adamently pro-death penalty, too. Changed on that as well. As I said, I do understand what the other side is saying. I find the logic wanting even if the intention may be perfectly sane (for many, but not all).

I never have understood why the other side thinks holding convictions and believing them to be correct and true is so wrong...If I didn't think there was a right way, of course I wouldn't believe in truth. I believe there is absolute truth--and relative morality ain't it--that's why you can believe you are right, and others are right also--it's the relative perspective. An absolute perspective does not allow for that flexiblity.

Felicity

Some of us don't do that.

As I said--i HAVE been persuaded. I know what worked for me.

It is emotional--but it needen't be if people have restraint. When I get irritated, it's not about the abortion issue so much as the resorting to illogic and emotions..

I agree.