• 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!

Man Who Killed Pro-Life Advocate Sentenced to Life in Prison

Dezaad said:
Because, from what I understand, he was outside a high school demonstrating with large, really gross pictures.

Why do you care that I think he deserves to be loathed?
Click to expand...

What was gross? Why are gross pictures grounds for "loathing"?
 
Mellie said:
What was gross? Why are gross pictures grounds for "loathing"?
Click to expand...

While I don't 'loathe' the guy who was killed, I do think it's inappropriate for someone to be holding up signs with pictures of aborted fetuses on them outside a high school.
 
molten_dragon said:
While I don't 'loathe' the guy who was killed, I do think it's inappropriate for someone to be holding up signs with pictures of aborted fetuses on them outside a high school.
Click to expand...

Would you rather it inside the high school?
 
molten_dragon said:
I'm not sure why you can't seem to process the fact that dictionaries do not provide objective facts about anything. Dictionary definitions should reflect the common usage of a word or they're meaningless. In order to do so, they are, by definition, subjective. This is true for all dictionaries, even medical ones.
Click to expand...

:shock: :rofl :doh

Is it your contention that Medical dictionary definitions are NOT factual and are therefore not relevant?
 
Chuz Life said:
:shock: :rofl :doh

Is it your contention that Medical dictionary definitions are NOT factual and are therefore not relevant?
Click to expand...

dictionaries provide definitions without clear context, and certain people just choose whatever context best suits their needs, without giving it much thought.
 
spud_meister said:
dictionaries provide definitions without clear context, and certain people just choose whatever context best suits their needs, without giving it much thought.
Click to expand...

:lol:

From the medical standpoint (context) a human fetus must be accepted as a "child" else the consensus required to get that fact accepted into the Medical Dictionary would never have been met.

You are attempting (with your ridicule, outrage and disbelief) to get me to ignore and dismiss that consensus,.... to ignore the relevence of the definitions and how they are supported by other biological findings.

A human fetus IS biologically the "offspring" of it's parents.

It is a "child."

You only want me to dismiss the dictionary definitions because they supports my conclusion and not your own. I have no doubt whatsoever that if the shoe were on the other foot,... you would insist that I respect the definitions which support your claims.
 
Last edited:
Mellie said:
Would you rather it inside the high school?
Click to expand...

I don't think it's really appropriate for him to be picketing abortion anywhere near a high school. He certainly has a right to do it, I'm not arguing that, but it seems to me like it doesn't serve much of a purpose, and it probably bothers some of the students there. Why not do it an an abortion clinic, where you're actually picketing the people who you have a problem with, rather than random high school kids who a significant portion of will never get an abortion or even need to get one.

In short, I'm not disputing his right to oppose abortion by picketing, I dispute his intentions in doing it at a high school.
 
Chuz Life said:
:shock: :rofl :doh

Is it your contention that Medical dictionary definitions are NOT factual and are therefore not relevant?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm glad you finally seem to be getting it. Dictionaries do NOT contain factual information. They contain subjective definitions of words that can (and do) change over time.
 
molten_dragon said:
I don't think it's really appropriate for him to be picketing abortion anywhere near a high school. He certainly has a right to do it, I'm not arguing that, but it seems to me like it doesn't serve much of a purpose, and it probably bothers some of the students there. Why not do it an an abortion clinic, where you're actually picketing the people who you have a problem with, rather than random high school kids who a significant portion of will never get an abortion or even need to get one.

In short, I'm not disputing his right to oppose abortion by picketing, I dispute his intentions in doing it at a high school.
Click to expand...

Yet, in another thread you wrote;

molten_dragon said:
No, video games do not cause violence.
Click to expand...

So a person could bombard their brain with hours upon hours of violent video images,... killing, blood, guts and other violent and gorey images,... and no real affect....

But a guy holding a sign on the walkway in front of their school has a greater impact on them?

Who knew?
 
Chuz Life said:
You only want me to dismiss the dictionary definitions because they supports my conclusion and not your own. I have no doubt whatsoever that if the shoe were on the other foot,... you would insist that I respect the definitions which support your claims.
Click to expand...

I realize that this isn't directed at me, but I'm going to respond anyway, and call BS. I've not once tried to use a dictionary to support my claims, regardless of the fact that I could very easily do so.

From the medical dictionary definition that YOU posted.

Chuz Life said:
CHILD;


child (chīld)
n.
  1. A person between birth and puberty.
  2. An unborn infant; a fetus.
  3. An infant; a baby.
  4. One who is childish or immature.
  5. A son or daughter; an offspring.
The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary
Copyright © 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Click to expand...

The FIRST definition listed there supports my views and not your own, but I've not once tried to use that as factual support of my claims, because I realize that it isn't in any way shape or form factual. Maybe it's time for you to clue in on that too?
 
molten_dragon said:
I realize that this isn't directed at me, but I'm going to respond anyway, and call BS. I've not once tried to use a dictionary to support my claims, regardless of the fact that I could very easily do so.

From the medical dictionary definition that YOU posted.



The FIRST definition listed there supports my views and not your own, but I've not once tried to use that as factual support of my claims, because I realize that it isn't in any way shape or form factual. Maybe it's time for you to clue in on that too?
Click to expand...

Molten,.. do you understand the concepts of "and" verses "or?"

When a dictionary has multiple definitions,... it's "and" not or.

A fetus is a "child" and a teenager is a child.

It's not either or.
 
Chuz Life said:
Yet, in another thread you wrote;



So a person could bombard their brain with hours upon hours of violent video images,... killing, blood, guts and other violent and gorey images,... and no real affect....

But a guy holding a sign on the walkway in front of their school has a greater impact on them?

Who knew?
Click to expand...

What on earth does whether or not video games cause violence and a guy picketing abortion in front of a high school have to do with each other?

Like I said, I'm not saying the guy shouldn't picket, but maybe he should do it at an abortion clinic. You know, that place where people who want abortions go to get abortions, and all the EEEEEEEVIIIIL abortion doctors hang out? That's the appropriate place to picket about abortion, a high school is not.
 
Chuz Life said:
Molten,.. do you understand the concepts of "and" verses "or?"

When a dictionary has multiple definitions,... it's "and" not or.

A fetus is a "child" and a teenager is a child.

It's not either or.
Click to expand...

Again, that's a subjective opinion, not a fact, just like the dictionary definition itself is.

I'm well aware that that's all I'm ever going to get from you, because of course, there ARE no objective facts that can prove your claims, but I'm hoping one of these days you'll be honest enough to at least admit it.
 
Chuz Life said:
:lol:

From the medical standpoint (context) a human fetus must be accepted as a "child" else the consensus required to get that fact accepted into the Medical Dictionary would never have been met.

You are attempting (with your ridicule, outrage and disbelief) to get me to ignore and dismiss that consensus,.... to ignore the relevence of the definitions and how they are supported by other biological findings.

A human fetus IS biologically the "offspring" of it's parents.

It is a "child."

You only want me to dismiss the dictionary definitions because they supports my conclusion and not your own. I have no doubt whatsoever that if the shoe were on the other foot,... you would insist that I respect the definitions which support your claims.
Click to expand...

well, i'm not entirely sure i've made claims in this thread.

but just to have a bit of fun, here's some more definitions

from wiki: A child (plural: children) is a human between the stages of birth and puberty.

or the one you quoted:
child (chīld)
n.

1. A person between birth and puberty.
2. An unborn infant; a fetus.
3. An infant; a baby.
4. One who is childish or immature.
5. A son or daughter; an offspring.





so there we have a few different definitions, now, of the ones i've bolded, two of them contradict the third, and you say the definition you selected must be true, for it to be in a dictionary, yet the very first definition specifically excludes the second one. So it seems to me, the use of the definitions simply reaches an impasse.
 
Last edited:
molten_dragon said:
Again, that's a subjective opinion, not a fact, just like the dictionary definition itself is.

I'm well aware that that's all I'm ever going to get from you, because of course, there ARE no objective facts that can prove your claims, but I'm hoping one of these days you'll be honest enough to at least admit it.
Click to expand...

Not that I agree with your summary,... but playing along,... (using your thought process) How are your arguments any less subjective than my own?

News for you,... They aren't.
 
Last edited:
spud_meister said:
well, i'm not entirely sure i've made claims in this thread.

but just to have a bit of fun, here's some more definitions

from wiki: A child (plural: children) is a human between the stages of birth and puberty.

or the one you quoted:
child (chīld)
n.

1. A person between birth and puberty.
2. An unborn infant; a fetus.
3. An infant; a baby.
4. One who is childish or immature.
5. A son or daughter; an offspring.

so there we have a few different definitions, now, of the one's i've bolded, two of them contradict the third, and you say the definition you selected must be true, for it to be in a dictionary, yet the very first definition specifically excludes the second one. So it seems to me, the use of the definitions simply reaches an impasse.
Click to expand...

Again,... it's 1,2 AND 3 are definitions of the word 'child.'

It's not 1, 2 OR 3.

The definition is 'inclusive' not exclusive.
 
Chuz Life said:
Again,... it's 1,2 AND 3 are definitions of the word 'child.'

It's not 1, 2 OR 3.

The definition is 'inclusive' not exclusive.
Click to expand...

how can they all be correct if 1 specifically excludes 3 from the definition?
 
spud_meister said:
well, i'm not entirely sure i've made claims in this thread.

but just to have a bit of fun, here's some more definitions

from wiki: A child (plural: children) is a human between the stages of birth and puberty.

or the one you quoted:
child (chīld)
n.

1. A person between birth and puberty.
2. An unborn infant; a fetus.
3. An infant; a baby.
4. One who is childish or immature.
5. A son or daughter; an offspring.





so there we have a few different definitions, now, of the ones i've bolded, two of them contradict the third, and you say the definition you selected must be true, for it to be in a dictionary, yet the very first definition specifically excludes the second one. So it seems to me, the use of the definitions simply reaches an impasse.
Click to expand...

Good point Spud. The whole "the definitions are inclusive" argument kind of falls apart when two of the definitions directly contradict each other.
 
Chuz Life said:
Not that I agree with your summary,... but playing along,... (using your thought process) How are your arguments any less subjective than my own?

News for you,... They aren't.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right, they aren't. The only difference between us is that I'm honest about it when my arguments are subjective.

And you're right that there are objective facts that support both sides of the argument (no, dictionary definitions aren't some of them). I really don't understand why you don't use them more.
 
molten_dragon said:
You're absolutely right, they aren't. The only difference between us is that I'm honest about it when my arguments are subjective.

And you're right that there are objective facts that support both sides of the argument (no, dictionary definitions aren't some of them). I really don't understand why you don't use them more.
Click to expand...

Oh,... please do list the some of the 'objective facts' that are not also found (and even clarified) in the dictionaries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom