View Poll Results: Is it appropriate to demand proof or facts on Debate Politics?

Voters
67. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. We need the facts to make for fair discussion.

    41 61.19%
  • Yes. Some people make stuff up.

    24 35.82%
  • No. Demanding proof is a cop out or scare tactic.

    4 5.97%
  • No. Proof is for trials in court and irrelavent for debates.

    1 1.49%
  • Yes. Other.

    22 32.84%
  • No. Other.

    4 5.97%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 28 of 60 FirstFirst ... 18262728293038 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 595

Thread: Proof and Facts[W:76"283]

  1. #271
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,872

    Re: Proof and Facts

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    1) again you have destroyed nothing but your own argument

    2) the existence of natural rights is not at issue
    It is the centerpiece of your very argument. But now that it has been crushed and flushed, you desperately are trying to distance yourself from the sinking ship.

    Every one of your constantly repeated points has already been refuted and all are subordinate to your main point which has been smashed and trashed.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  2. #272
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,683

    Re: Proof and Facts

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    It is the centerpiece of your very argument. But now that it has been crushed and flushed, you desperately are trying to distance yourself from the sinking ship.

    Every one of your constantly repeated points has already been refuted and all are subordinate to your main point which has been smashed and trashed.
    again you are diverting

    what is central in my argument is that your extremely limited and specious interpretation of the second amendment and your extremely fanciful and silly interpretation of Sec 8 clauses is completely contradicted by the entire foundation of the Constitution and the Bill of rights

    you haven't refuted anything. rather you constantly spam over and over the claim you have without any support for such a repetitive falsehood



  3. #273
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,872

    Re: Proof and Facts

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post

    3) your claim that the founders did not believe in natural rights for citizens is without any merit
    The very actions of the Founders demonstrate beyond any doubt or argument that they did NOT believe the crap they put on parchment as they openly violated and abused the very rights they claim all men held.




    4) you continue to deliberately confuse Extent of a right with coverage by the right
    If a right in reality does not exist - it covers nobody.

    5) you continue to engage in avoidance and evasion
    If I were any more direct about my refutation and destruction of your arguments it would make Hiroshima look like a marshmallow roast on a cub scout camp out.


    6) none of your evasive actions support your specious interpretation of the Second Amendment
    Since I have not been evasive - that charge fails on its face ---- as it always does when you trot out that phony card of your own making.

    7) you have provided no evidence rebutting the fact that the founders believed in natural rights
    That is a falsehood of the worst and most blatant sort. I gave you the statement of the Founders in the Declaration and their own history and own actions and own beliefs in their own words from the historical record to demonstrate to all but the intentionally gullible and politically naive virgins that they did not believe in natural rights. You refuse to even consider it because it destroys your own position.

    8) the only issue is the proper interpretation of the 2nd Amendment
    And, as always in these discussion, you mean YOUR interpretation.

    9) your interpretation is supported by absolutely no evidence, proof, logic or rational deduction
    No. My view is based on the actual Constitution and what it says and the powers given to Congress. I have stated this before and I state it again for your benefit: here is my interpretation of the Second Amendment..

    The Second Amendment says that the American people have the right to keep and bear arms. The duly elected representatives of the American people may exercise their Constitutional powers to enact legislation controlling and regulating firearms so long as they do not create an environment where the people cannot exercise their right.

    Every single legislator who has voted for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
    Every single legislative body who has voted to pass a law for the regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
    Every single governor who has proposed a law for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
    Every single governor who has signed into law any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
    Every single president proposed a law for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
    Every single president who has signed into law any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
    Every single judge or justice who has upheld the constitutionality of a law regulating firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
    Every single Court which has voted to uphold the constitutionality of a law regulating firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.


    And it is the agreement of all those above with my interpretation which counts in the final analysis.


    a) rather your interpretation is based on YOUR OPINION that some of the founders lied when they signed the DOI
    that is an undisputable fact of history.

    b) no document from that era supports your nonsense
    The Declaration itself and the actions of the Founders who wrote it and signed it support my claim 1000%.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  4. #274
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,683

    Re: Proof and Facts

    tl dr repeat spam

    what politicians did post 1939 means nothing

    and your only argument is that the founders didn't believe in what they wrote is beyond pathetic when it comes to rights they wanted to exercise

    find an argument that is actually based on something other than your opinion and your desire to pretend the 2A allows all the anti gun crap the Democrats are trying to foist on us



  5. #275
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,872

    Re: Proof and Facts

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    again you are diverting
    Again, you demonstrate a complete lack of knowledge about what the word actually means. My posts 271 and 273 took every single one of what you think are your points, refuted them, destroyed them, and left nothing standing except you clinging to your belief and forced to repeat your already refuted arguments like a mantra of faith.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  6. #276
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,683

    Re: Proof and Facts

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Again, you demonstrate a complete lack of knowledge about what the word actually means. My posts 271 and 273 took every single one of what you think are your points, refuted them, destroyed them, and left nothing standing except you clinging to your belief and forced to repeat your already refuted arguments like a mantra of faith.
    more diversion-try again



  7. #277
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,872

    Re: Proof and Facts

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    more diversion-try again
    Your continued misuse of the word demonstrates one of two things
    1- you really have no idea what the word DIVERSION means, or
    2- you have nothing else left so you engage in intentional falsehoods about my positions putting forth claims without foundation or support and you know you are misusing the word.

    I notice that it is YOU Turtle - you - who are unable to take my points and speak to them, let alone refute them. By that very fact it is you who are attempting to turn this into something other than actual debate on the issues and on the positions you take on the issues.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  8. #278
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,683

    Re: Proof and Facts

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Your continued misuse of the word demonstrates one of two things
    1- you really have no idea what the word DIVERSION means, or
    2- you have nothing else left so you engage in intentional falsehoods about my positions putting forth claims without foundation or support and you know you are misusing the word.

    I notice that it is YOU Turtle - you - who are unable to take my points and speak to them, let alone refute them. By that very fact it is you who are attempting to turn this into something other than actual debate on the issues and on the positions you take on the issues.
    opinion noted, not shared. constantly arguing whether natural rights exist is diversionary. The only issue is how to interpret documents that were written by men who believed in natural rights

    so all of your rants about the existence of natural rights are DIVERSIONS



  9. #279
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,872

    Re: Proof and Facts

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    opinion noted, not shared. constantly arguing whether natural rights exist is diversionary.
    Since it is the very centerpiece of your argument and has been effectively destroyed, I can see why you are so desperate to distance yourself from it.

    And since it is the centerpiece of your argument - NO DISCUSSION OF IT IS A DIVERSION but a direct head-on tackling of your key issue.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  10. #280
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,683

    Re: Proof and Facts

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Since it is the very centerpiece of your argument and has been effectively destroyed, I can see why you are so desperate to distance yourself from it.
    again that is dishonest. the centerpiece of my argument is that my interpretation of the 2A and Sec 8 is consistent with the foundation that the Founders based the government (i.e. the constitution upon) that being, an expansive reading of rights and a limited grant of powers to the new government

    you on the other hand-read government powers beyond any acceptable limits and read the 2A so narrowly as to make it worthless

    and your only support for such silliness is

    1) claiming the founders lied

    2) confusing the extent of a right with the coverage of the right

    3) pretending that the issue turns on whether Natural rights exist rather than admitting what matters is DID THE FOUNDERS BELIEVE in natural rights



Page 28 of 60 FirstFirst ... 18262728293038 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •