Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 8/24/2004 5:00:55 PM EST
This thread isn't necessarily about the best argument, the one that made you laugh the most, or whatever. It's just what is most appealing. I like them to be sound and trip switches in your mind.

My favorite is anti-draft.

A country that does not have enough people willing to put their lives on the line for their country does not deserve to exist, and in fact should be destroyed by an opposing army so that it can start anew.

What's yours?
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:03:29 PM EST
Stupid threads that waste bandwith, can't stand them.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:05:37 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:09:47 PM EST

Originally Posted By 82ndAbn:
People who believe, like Xavier U. Prof. Peter Kirstein, that the military are not to be thanked for defending our freedoms.

That'll set me off into a verbal tirade.




Well, I mean what specific argument. Like "people in the military are stupid" and the countering (favorite) argument would be some example of how they're as smart or smarter than civilians.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:11:15 PM EST

Originally Posted By benbob:
Stupid threads that waste bandwith, can't stand them.



My favorite argument against this is known as "go to hell."

Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:11:43 PM EST
Mine is this: Were two apples two apples before the number two was invented (in any form)? How can they be? there WAS no two! That's BS! The question seems to come down to whether the number was invented or discovered.

I second selective service for the same reason. That'll throw me into a tirade.

Patrick
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:13:11 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:16:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/24/2004 5:18:29 PM EST by Sniper_Wolfe]

Originally Posted By Patrick319:
Mine is this: Were two apples two apples before the number two was invented (in any form)? How can they be? there WAS no two! That's BS! The question seems to come down to whether the number was invented or discovered.

I second selective service for the same reason. That'll throw me into a tirade.

Patrick



They still have the quality of being two, even if the number itself does not exist. The number system was invented, the quality discovered.

Edit to say we've been here before.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:20:38 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:25:26 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:26:04 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/24/2004 5:26:38 PM EST by Sniper_Wolfe]

Originally Posted By Sweep:

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:
A country that does not have enough people willing to put their lives on the line for their country does not deserve to exist, and in fact should be destroyed by an opposing army so that it can start anew.



Dang SW, that's good! I would even expand on that saying that a country that didn't have a draft and relied on volunteers should have greater incentive to encourae all citizens to own their on arms and be "well regulated" (well trained) with them. If you're going to rely on a volunteer army, they need to already know how to shoot.

I guess one of my favorite arguments actually has to do with the Christian Right:

If it's already against God's law, why do you need another law by men declaring the same thing? Apply this to abortion, homosexuality, prayer in school...whatever.

Then when they say they are instructed by God to stand against these things, point them to 1 Cor. Ch. 3:1-13. Basically it says don't judge the people outside the church, but to deal with them on an every day basis like you normally would. to judge them is a sin because it's not up to you to judge them, that's God's right, not yours. However, judge the people in your own church. That whole chapter was about hypocritical Christains judging people outside of the church, boycotting their businesses and refusing to even talk to people outside their church, but yet they ignored the guy that took his own father wife for his own.



Your argument is very clever, but I would rip it to shreds.

Edit to say that I meant insofar as abortion was concerned. But we'll keep abortion out of this thread (as far as inter-member arguments go).
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:26:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:
This thread isn't necessarily about the best argument, the one that made you laugh the most, or whatever. It's just what is most appealing. I like them to be sound and trip switches in your mind.

My favorite is anti-draft.

A country that does not have enough people willing to put their lives on the line for their country does not deserve to exist, and in fact should be destroyed by an opposing army so that it can start anew.

What's yours?




The draft should only be put into affect when our country is about to be invaded or is in immediate danger. Otherwise I dont feel like dying because some politican felt like liberating some piece of shit country.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:30:38 PM EST

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:

My favorite is anti-draft.

A country that does not have enough people willing to put their lives on the line for their country does not deserve to exist, and in fact should be destroyed by an opposing army so that it can start anew.




I see you're a Heinlein fan.

Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:32:42 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:35:19 PM EST

Originally Posted By Sweep:

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:
Your argument is very clever, but I would rip it to shreds.

Edit to say that I meant insofar as abortion was concerned. But we'll keep abortion out of this thread (as far as inter-member arguments go).



Your thread your wishes.

...but I'm up for the challenge at Gunstock if you plan on making it this year. With the understanding that we both realize, that neither one of us is going to change the other's mind about it. Actually, I think it's wrong, just don't think gov't should have any say about it. But that's for a later time.



IM sent before I read this. Will talk more at Gunstock.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:39:26 PM EST

Originally Posted By the:

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:

My favorite is anti-draft.

A country that does not have enough people willing to put their lives on the line for their country does not deserve to exist, and in fact should be destroyed by an opposing army so that it can start anew.




I see you're a Heinlein fan.




Yes.

I read this argument some time ago while there was a debate on this site.

I don't remember the exact wording but I put it as best I could.

People really have very few original arguments. I only have a handful. My favorite original (by original I mean that I didn't personally hear it from someone, even though someone else may have said it first) argument is for abortion (even though I'm against it):

Abortion FORCES a woman to carry a child for 9 months. FORCING someone to do something like that goes against liberty itself. Liberty is a greater thing than life.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:42:55 PM EST

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:

Originally Posted By Sweep:

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:
Your argument is very clever, but I would rip it to shreds.

Edit to say that I meant insofar as abortion was concerned. But we'll keep abortion out of this thread (as far as inter-member arguments go).



Your thread your wishes.

...but I'm up for the challenge at Gunstock if you plan on making it this year. With the understanding that we both realize, that neither one of us is going to change the other's mind about it. Actually, I think it's wrong, just don't think gov't should have any say about it. But that's for a later time.



IM sent before I read this. Will talk more at Gunstock.



Just don't do any 'butt-slappin' and Sarge won't have to do a movie about y'all!

BigDozer66
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:49:57 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:52:53 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 5:56:45 PM EST

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:

Originally Posted By the:

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:

My favorite is anti-draft.

A country that does not have enough people willing to put their lives on the line for their country does not deserve to exist, and in fact should be destroyed by an opposing army so that it can start anew.




I see you're a Heinlein fan.




Yes.

I read this argument some time ago while there was a debate on this site.

I don't remember the exact wording but I put it as best I could.

People really have very few original arguments. I only have a handful. My favorite original (by original I mean that I didn't personally hear it from someone, even though someone else may have said it first) argument is for abortion (even though I'm against it):

Abortion FORCES a woman to carry a child for 9 months. FORCING someone to do something like that goes against liberty itself. Liberty is a greater thing than life.




Im calling BS here. She is never 'forced' to do anything. Use of birth control and wise decisions would prevent this from ever happening. But they have to live with their decisions and mistakes and have enough guts to not take the easy way out.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 6:03:54 PM EST

Originally Posted By WolfAR15:

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:

Originally Posted By the:

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:

My favorite is anti-draft.

A country that does not have enough people willing to put their lives on the line for their country does not deserve to exist, and in fact should be destroyed by an opposing army so that it can start anew.




I see you're a Heinlein fan.




Yes.

I read this argument some time ago while there was a debate on this site.

I don't remember the exact wording but I put it as best I could.

People really have very few original arguments. I only have a handful. My favorite original (by original I mean that I didn't personally hear it from someone, even though someone else may have said it first) argument is for abortion (even though I'm against it):

Abortion FORCES a woman to carry a child for 9 months. FORCING someone to do something like that goes against liberty itself. Liberty is a greater thing than life.




Im calling BS here. She is never 'forced' to do anything. Use of birth control and wise decisions would prevent this from ever happening. But they have to live with their decisions and mistakes and have enough guts to not take the easy way out.



Sure she is, she's forced to carry the kid.

You can argue that she gave up her right to not carry a kid when she decided to take the risk of having sex, but passively giving up rights is opening Pandora's box.

OTOH, you can argue that right-to-life outweighs right to not carry a child. That's my pick.

Link Posted: 8/24/2004 6:12:45 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/24/2004 6:13:03 PM EST by AZ-K9]
Lettting a guy put his penis in your vagina is NOT passive.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 6:26:03 PM EST
I'm against selective service too. I think everybody should give up at least two years, after training is completed, before you can claim tax deductions.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 6:46:34 PM EST

Originally Posted By AZ-K9:
Lettting a guy put his penis in your vagina is NOT passive.



I was worried about the way I phrased it when I posted.

The thing is, if you give up most rights, that is the activity you're trying to do. If you give up your property rights over a candy bar, you're actively giving it to another person. The decision is intentionally made to do that. With getting pregnant, in the case of abortion, it's an accident (unless they just changed their mind).
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 6:53:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By AZ-K9:
Lettting a guy put his penis in your vagina is NOT passive.



Apparently you've never had a "dead fuck." That's OK, because I wouldn't wish one on my worst enema - er, enemy.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 7:03:29 PM EST
Them furry queers that infect gaming boards with their cartoon animal porn signatures and what not.

I crushed them in an arguement about how wrong it is... and the backwards shits never got it.
Top Top