Louis
Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006
|
| Quote (Ftk @ Jan. 25 2011,18:17) | | Quote (Louis @ Jan. 25 2011,11:33) | | Quote (Ftk @ Jan. 25 2011,17:18) | | Quote | These "lifestyles" to which people who don't share your precise response to a photo, what are they? How do you know what you claim to know? Why is someone's emotional response to a photo predicated on some claimed lifestyle that person has?
You're making claims and judgements you have no basis for, do you think that might have some bearing on your intellectual integrity?
Louis |
Same lifestyle as I've lived from time to time. You play, you pay. I'm not be condescending. I could bring up my past payments, but I don't particularly care to see this thread turn into a Jerry Springer circus.
I'm just stating the obvious...chill brother. |
Does anything you've said even remotely resemble details? No.
Does anything you've said even remotely resemble an argument? No.
I'm not asking for your personal details, FTK, I profoundly do not care about them.
You made a very specific claim which runs thus:
"People who do not share my emotional and visceral reaction to a photo of an aborted foetus are Dahmeresque sub-humans who do not share my emotional and visceral reaction because of their lifestyle".
This is not obvious, it's not even true as it happens, and this brother is so chilled you could keep a side of meat in him for a month.
You make a claim, you support a claim. Period. End of story, The fat lady she singeth and cetera.
If you cannot support the claim, say so and retract it. No biggie.
Louis |
Again, stating the obvious.....no scientific graphs and charts needed.
Let's say for a moment, that we all lived the life....one man/one woman forever Amen.
That imediately does away with virtually all std's and the vast, vast majority of all unwanted pregnancies. Not all....but most. And, we'd have those little babies anyway and work things out.
Lifestyle....period. |
Where does one even start?
And weren't we talking about REACTIONS TO PHOTOS, FTK? Weren't you the one who complained (wrongly) about the errors of others for ascribing an inconsistent position to you?
So the people who are the Dahmer-esque sub-humans are not the ones who do not share your reaction to a photo, but the people who have an abortion now? You're being more than a little inconsistent FTK. I've bolded your claim in the quoted post above. Support that claim.
You said that people who looked at a photo and didn't feel a set of feelings you described yourself as feeling were Dahmeresque sub-humans and only felt that way because of their lifestyle. Let me give you a hint, the set of people who do not share your reaction to those sorts of photos are not necessarily the same as the set of people who have had abortions. You are talking about two different sets of people.
To clarify this even more for you, it is possible for, say, a single, celibate pathologist to look at photos of dimembered foetuses with a greater degree of dispassion than you and to have never had, or been responsible for, a pregnancy that was deliberately terminated by abortion. Thus the set of people who have had abortions does not include the set of people who have different reactions to your own when presented with those photographs. Lifestyle? I think not.
It is equally possible for a promiscuous person, who has had many abortions, or been responsible for many pregnancies which ended in abortions, to have precisely the visceral, emotional reaction to those photos you do. Thus the set of people who have the same reactions to these photos as you does not include the set of people who have not had abortions. Lifestyle again? In a word: no.
Your tedious moralising is as unexamined and bigotted as your life.
Louis
--------------
Bye.
|
