View Poll Results: Am I being dishonest?
- 10. You may not vote on this poll
Re: Is changing context dishonest?
IMO context is everything.
Originally Posted by megaprogman
If I say "you shouldn't be allowed to forbid firearms on your publicly accessible property without a permit because that is a hazard", I'm not talking about your home. I specified "publicly accessible", as in properties and structures which must comply with Public Accommodation laws. If your counter argument is not talking about privately owned property which is publicly accessible, you are being dishonest.
"What if I want to ban red shirts"? Well, the absence of red shirts is not a hazard whereas the absence of firearms is, just like the absence of a fire suppression system is a hazard; so as you're no longer talking about hazards you are being dishonest.
Perhaps someone says "Gay marriage should be banned". A typical retort is "the government shouldn't legislate who I can love", or "keep the government out of my bedroom".
The original position against gay marriage had nothing to do with love or anyone's bedroom, so both of these responses are dishonest.
And again, perhaps someone claims "the unborn have the right to life". Replys such as "my body, my choice" are deliberate attempts to change the context as the original argument had nothing to the rights of the women but the rights of the unborn (and it's not her body being aborted anyway).
Last edited by Jerry; 06-28-10 at 06:18 PM.