- Joined
- Feb 7, 2012
- Messages
- 58,419
- Reaction score
- 26,458
- Location
- Mentor Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Look dude, if you want to continue to look foolish by misusing a term, that's your business. But here is a definition and an easy to read example to help you better understand the word and to identify it when it actually happens. And, no, I don't expect you to get it.1.) false dictionary definition with link proves your statments wrong TWICE now lol
by definition you in fact made a strawman argument
facts and the dictionary support my statement what do you have on your side again?
2.) this is ANOTHER strawman because I didnt claim you said that, I made an analogy that proved your original failed straw man to be even more wrong.
facts win again, tell us that "silly" line again LMAO
try to keep up
Look dude, if you want to continue to look foolish by misusing a term, that's your business. But here is a definition and an easy to read example to help you better understand the word and to identify it when it actually happens. And, no, I don't expect you to get it.
The straw man fallacy involves misrepresenting an opponent’s position to make it easier to refute. Straw man arguments often oversimplify opposing views or disregard inconvenient points in favor of points that are easy to argue against.
Examples
In many instances, the person committing the straw man fallacy highlights the most extreme position of the opposing side—for example:
Opposing argument: Teens should be taught about contraception methods so they can practice safe sex should they choose to have intercourse.
Straw man argument: Proponents of sex education want to give kids license to have sex with no consequences.
I'm refuting those that claim religion as fact. This thread is about Same Sex Marriage licenses, not religion.
Oh my God. This must be what its like in the Twilight Zone. I gave you a definition and an example and you just pretend like nothing has happened. Look dude, believe whatever you want. Call everything a straw man, what the hell do I care. Every time I get into a conversation with you I want to kick myself for doing so. So you go back to misunderstanding simple definitions and Ill go kick myself for wasting my timethe dictionary and already prove you wrong, there's no changing this fact :shrug:
Ill go with Websters over your opinion and failed strawman, you know since its silly and foolish to use facts and the definition of a word. No need to lash out and name call because your argument failed and it was factually exposed as a strawman.
would you like them AGAIN?
http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...-sex-marriage-licenses-76.html#post1063868729
: a weak or imaginary argument or opponent that is set up to be easily defeated
do you have one solid reason why i should ignore facts and the dictionary, if so please provide it now LMAO
facts win again
There you go again preaching God as if it were fact. Look, you are entitled to YOUR opinion. Live YOUR life the way YOU want to live it. Don't tell others that are gay what they can and cannot do. Maybe you should spend more time worrying about YOUR sins than some homosexuals getting married.
I don't believe blarg is gay and the subject ..as you said, is SSM so, I'll worry about that for time being.
They're not creating any laws here. They are striking restrictions within laws down. This places those laws in a state where they are not restrictive, which in the case of marriage, means that anyone who was restricted legally from entering into marriage due to the specific restriction that was struck down as unconstitutional, can now enter into it because there is no longer a valid restriction preventing them from doing so.
What are most opponants of SSM?
Religious
I don't believe blarg is gay and the subject ..as you said, is SSM so, I'll worry about that for time being.
Bestiality, polygamy and pedophia on that list? How about ritualistic cannibalism?Many already are, you simply don't recognize it.
Many would consider bondage deviant behavior, and it is legal so long as it is consensual. Many would consider S&M deviant behavior, yet it is legal, at least to a point and again as long as it is consensual. Swinging, fetishes (at least some), and crossdressing, all considered by many to be deviant behavior, and all are legal (as I said, the fetishes to a point, it depends on the particular fetish, but most are legal). Others consider interracial or interfaith relationships to be deviant behaviors, they are legal. Some consider sex before marriage or masturbation to be deviant behaviors. Guess what? Both are legal.
It ends where the majority/state can show a legitimate (at least) state interest is furthered by restricting that behavior.
Beatiality, polygamy and pedophia on that list? How about ritualist cannibalism?
Oh my God. This must be what its like in the Twilight Zone. I gave you a definition and an example and you just pretend like nothing has happened. Look dude, believe whatever you want. Call everything a straw man, what the hell do I care. Every time I get into a conversation with you I want to kick myself for doing so. So you go back to misunderstanding simple definitions and Ill go kick myself for wasting my time
true im not he might have been referring to gay people and ssm in general though
No that is a lie on both counts.The mayor of Houston (who is Gay) just tried to pass a law that would restrict what ministers and priests could say from the pulpit regarding homosexuality. So don't tell me laws aren't created specifically for Gays.
Oh my God. This must be what its like in the Twilight Zone. I gave you a definition and an example and you just pretend like nothing has happened. Look dude, believe whatever you want. Call everything a straw man, what the hell do I care. Every time I get into a conversation with you I want to kick myself for doing so. So you go back to misunderstanding simple definitions and Ill go kick myself for wasting my time
Oh my God. This must be what its like in the Twilight Zone. I gave you a definition and an example and you just pretend like nothing has happened. Look dude, believe whatever you want. Call everything a straw man, what the hell do I care. Every time I get into a conversation with you I want to kick myself for doing so. So you go back to misunderstanding simple definitions and Ill go kick myself for wasting my time
More slippery slope nonsense from someone that is losing the SSM argument.
The mayor of Houston (who is Gay) just tried to pass a law that would restrict what ministers and priests could say from the pulpit regarding homosexuality. So don't tell me laws aren't created specifically for Gays.
The mayor of Houston (who is Gay) just tried to pass a law that would restrict what ministers and priests could say from the pulpit regarding homosexuality. So don't tell me laws aren't created specifically for Gays.
I asked "how far will it go" and got no answer (including from you)
50 years ago, no one expected Gays and Ssm to be normalized or legal.
My point is as valid as it gets.
And religion CANNOT be proven as fact, therefore should not be used to decide law STRICTLY on religion alone.
I asked "how far will it go" and got no answer (including from you)
50 years ago, no one expected Gays and Ssm to be normalized or legal.
My point is as valid as it gets.
Bestiality, polygamy and pedophia on that list? How about ritualistic cannibalism?
You know exactly where I'm going here.
I asked "how far will it go" and got no answer (including from you)
50 years ago, no one expected Gays and Ssm to be normalized or legal.
My point is as valid as it gets.
Bestiality, polygamy and pedophia on that list? How about ritualistic cannibalism?
You know exactly where I'm going here.
Yes, the subject is SSM and you have said you want to force YOUR beliefs on others. That is authoritarian.
'fraid not...No that is a lie on both counts.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?