• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is it now time for America to bomb England in the name of freedom, justice, peace ?

robin said:
Oh & your thoughts on religion.. a virus of the mind. You are supposed to be a scientist aren't you?
Click to expand...
Robin... you've been reading far too many Graham Hancock novels. Religion has nothing to do with either biology or virology.

robin said:
Can't you see the irony intended in the thread title?
Click to expand...
I do indeed grasp the *satire* intended in the thread title. The problem here is that the thread title is not mere simple satire. In composition and syntax, it qualifies as a rhetorical. In other words, it is structured to superficially resemble a legitimate question, but in actuality it is a political statement on your part.

Are you so insecure in your beliefs and viewpoints that you feel compelled to resort to word gymnastics and rhetorical gyrations? This compunction only serves to suggest a lack of inner conviction on your part. If you have a political position that you feel strongly about... then articulate that position with certainty and confidence. Others may indeed then disagree with your stated position, but they will also respect your honesty and resolve. To do any less than this cheapens both the topic and your credibility

I happen to agree with some of the points you promote. I do not however, agree with the sleazy and underhanded manner in which you promote them. Your wanton tendency to wander far off-topic depreciates (and also defines) your reputation and terribly emasculates your political position. Race and genetics simply do not belong and are miscast in the War On Terror category.

As I said, I agree with some of your positions. Your positions that I disagree with? I would enjoy an honest engagement in these... but cannot commit myself do so unless and until you resolve to remain on-topic and discard the unnecessary diversions and polemical theatrics.

Do you feel confident in your ability to present your political positions with honesty and persuasiveness? Do you feel comfortable with your level of language and vocabulary? Are you convinced that your core beliefs possess an intrinsic integrity and morality?

If you have answered all the above questions with a resounding yes, then please adjust your debate style to articulate and accentuate those affirmations. Do you actually require a Billo Really sitting on your shoulder like a trained parrot? I think not. Believe it or not robin, it is not my intent in this post to lecture you from on-high or to belittle you. I honestly believe that you have tremendous potential. All I seek is for you to unlock and realize that potential... for it would allow us to lunge and parry with unlimited vim and vigor. You can retain your current sleight-of-hand-smoke-and-mirrors debate style... or you can amend and elevate it to become a legitimate force to be reckoned with. It is all entirely up to you.


 
Tashah said:
Robin... you've been reading far too many Graham Hancock novels. Religion has nothing to do with either biology or virology.
I do indeed grasp the *satire* intended in the thread title. The problem here is that the thread title is not mere simple satire. In composition and syntax, it qualifies as a rhetorical. In other words, it is structured to superficially resemble a legitimate question, but in actuality it is a political statement on your part.
Click to expand...
Of course I was being rhetorical. I used that as an instrument for the satire & irony :smile:
Lets not overlook the absurd & farcical.
I love to extract & highlight the absurd & farcical in a world that is such at times when it can least afford to be. I remember Adam West’s TV series of Batman that was such a wonderful vehicle for highlighting the absurd & the farcical within our establishments & indeed life itself, in such a delectable manner.

As regards whether my thread title is satirical or ironic.....
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
One entry found for satire.
Main Entry: sat•ire
Pronunciation: 'sa-"tIr
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French or Latin; Middle French, from Latin satura, satira, perhaps from (lanx) satura dish of mixed ingredients, from feminine of satur well-fed; akin to Latin satis enough -- more at SAD
1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn
2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly
synonym see WIT

Tashah said:
Are you so insecure in your beliefs and viewpoints that you feel compelled to resort to word gymnastics and rhetorical gyrations? This compunction only serves to suggest a lack of inner conviction on your part. If you have a political position that you feel strongly about... then articulate that position with certainty and confidence. Others may indeed then disagree with your stated position, but they will also respect your honesty and resolve. To do any less than this cheapens both the topic and your credibility.
I’m not sure rhetorical gyrations are a sign of lack of confidence & can sometimes actually be more effective & thought provoking than blunt statements made with certainty. After all… what could be more important than to provoke thoughts regarding whether wars are being fought in the right way or in the right place or whether they should be fought at all.
I happen to agree with some of the points you promote. I do not however, agree with the sleazy and underhanded manner in which you promote them. Your wanton tendency to wander far off-topic depreciates (and also defines) your reputation and terribly emasculates your political position. Race and genetics simply do not belong and are miscast in the War on Terror category.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure rhetorical gyrations are a sign of lack of confidence & can sometimes actually be more effective & thought provoking than blunt statements made with certainty. After all… what could be more important than to provoke thoughts regarding whether wars are being fought in the right way or in the right place or whether they should be fought at all.
We are all guilty of drifting off topic sometimes :3oops:
'Sleazy' not the appropriate word… but lets agree to differ.
I sweep with a broad brush. But I did try to get back on track in post #16.

As regards religion a virus of the mind… this is serious stuff… not Graham Hancock.
There are compelling analogies to be drawn between how religions & how virus’s evolve & manipulate their host to replicate.
http://jeromekahn123.tripod.com/againstreligion/id7.html

Please don't compare me to Mengele again. That is sick & worse than a cheap & sleazy shot. His mere name gives me the shivers.

I look forward to lunging & parrying with unlimited vim and vigour, but I can’t guarantee my input will be free from satire. I shall try to be as dour as my potential permits though :2razz:
 
Last edited:
Oops.. I got the quote in the wrong place... oh well it was midnight
waleed.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom