Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation"

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

No it doesn't, we get you think it does but it simply doesn't. This is why you can't answer my question. Until you can you got nothing. Here's a hint you never will be able too either because the definition in fact does not support your subjective criteria.

In other words, you're either trolling, in denial, or are simply attempting to argue at a level of reading comprehension and mental agility so low that I can't actually accuse you of it here without getting infracted.

You're literally trying to claim that the definition "Mutilation is an act of physical injury which degrades the appearance and function of the living body" does not contain the criteria "physical injury," "degrades," or "function," just because you don't like it. Somehow, you think that's a "fact," where simply seeing the arrangement of words in that definition as they actually, clearly, exist in reality is an "opinion."

In any case, we're done here. Smoke actually wrote a post worth responding to a few pages back. I've wasted enough time on you.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

In other words, you're either trolling, in denial, or are simply attempting to argue at a level of reading comprehension and mental agility so low that I can't actually accuse you of it here without getting infracted.

In any case, we're done here. Smoke actually wrote a post worth responding to a few pages back. I've wasted enough time on you.

That's what I thought, continue to run and further show that you can' t back up your false claim. Your opinion is noted but it will never be fact as the definition you posted proves.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation"

We've already established that you seem to be a bit iffy on what the word "opinion" even means, and you don't seem to be able to acknowledge the definition of the word "mutilate" provided as it actually exists either, sooo... :shrug:

:2wave:

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutalation

We've already established that you seem to be a bit iffy on what the word "opinion" even means, and you don't seem to be able to acknowledge the definition of the word "mutilate" provided as it actually exists either, sooo... :shrug:

:2wave:

The topic is mutilation and how you want your opinion to be fact but so far it has come up drastically short. I'm not the topic nor will trying to make me the topic change the fact that you are running from my question, you can't answer it nor can you support your claim that your opinion is fact. Once again your opinion is noted but it will never be fact as the definition you posted proves.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation"

Have you and AgentJ ever hooked up?

You really consider it.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

Jesus, people...

Words carry more than just the literal dictionary definition. Over time words adopt different social, connotative, and cultural applications which reflect or alter how people perceive and apply certain words.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition

Mutilation is often very closely associated with harsh disfigurement - people think the word sounds unappetizing and brutal. It's closely connected to horror books and movies (which reflects this cultural connotation, but also encourages people to continue to associate it this way).

Therefor - yeah - words are both a literal thing (dictionary definition) and a highly subjective thing (connotations that are applied and adopted in different regions and cultures - etc).

So is it a medical term - yeah sure, by the literal meaning it can be.
Is it also something harsh and unappealing - yeah, sure. By the cultural connotation applies because of modern entertainment and connections, absolutely.

So what is anyone even arguing about? Words have more than one meaning. English is a very dynamic language and things change drastically over time. Our words change meanings and shift to reflect these changes. You cannot really argue that - that's how language works.

Anytime someone only clings to the tight literal definition and forgets all the other ways words take on connotations - I roll my eyes. Read a book every now and then.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation"

Have you and AgentJ ever hooked up?

You really consider it.

Hahaha somebody else tried that and they also failed. Still running and can't answer the topic question huh? Your opinion remains just that, opinion.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

So what is anyone even arguing about? Words have more than one meaning. English is a very dynamic language and things change drastically over time. Our words change meanings and shift to reflect these changes. You cannot really argue that - that's how language works.

I can answer that. It seems the OP wants everybody to accept the subjective criteria posted as fact and nothing else. Many have pointed out that that it's not fact. When asked where the posted criteria exists in the definition that makes it the only fact and acceptable one, none could be provided.

 

[Henrin]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation"

Hahaha somebody else tried that and they also failed. Still running and can't answer the topic question huh? Your opinion remains just that, opinion.

It's just that you two seem like a good match. :lol:

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

Jesus, people...

Words carry more than just the literal dictionary definition. Over time words adopt different social, connotative, and cultural applications which reflect or alter how people perceive and apply certain words.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition

Mutilation is often very closely associated with harsh disfigurement - people think the word sounds unappetizing and brutal. It's closely connected to horror books and movies (which reflects this cultural connotation, but also encourages people to continue to associate it this way).

Therefor - yeah - words are both a literal thing (dictionary definition) and a highly subjective thing (connotations that are applied and adopted in different regions and cultures - etc).

So is it a medical term - yeah sure, by the literal meaning it can be.
Is it also something harsh and unappealing - yeah, sure. By the cultural connotation applies because of modern entertainment and connections, absolutely.

So what is anyone even arguing about? Words have more than one meaning. English is a very dynamic language and things change drastically over time. Our words change meanings and shift to reflect these changes. You cannot really argue that - that's how language works.

Anytime someone only clings to the tight literal definition and forgets all the other ways words take on connotations - I roll my eyes. Read a book every now and then.

Again, the simple fact of the matter is that, going by the objective definition of the word, surgical sterilization fits the criteria for being mutilation.

Some people dislike that, because it makes them feel "yucky" inside, apparently, and so they're trying to invent reasons why they shouldn't have to acknowledge that reality.

That's the thread in a nutshell. :shrug:

 

[Mach]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

Jesus, people...
Words carry more than just the literal dictionary definition. Over time words adopt different social, connotative, and cultural applications which reflect or alter how people perceive and apply certain words.

Of course you're correct, it seems like that is common knowledge...why it would be rejected is fascinating.
Even with seemingly literal definitions, the practice of law rests on interpretations, precedent, etc. Of course we would prefer it to be precise. As it turns out, reality has limits on precision (literally).

An example of words changing, the one that annoyed me recently was the change of the word "literally"
informal: used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true.
"I have received literally thousands of letters"

Yes indeed. Literally, but not really literally! Everyone misused it so much that it becomes accepted.

 

[beefheart]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutilation

In other words, you're either trolling, in denial, or are simply attempting to argue at a level of reading comprehension and mental agility so low that I can't actually accuse you of it here without getting infracted.

You're literally trying to claim that the definition "Mutilation is an act of physical injury which degrades the appearance and function of the living body" does not contain the criteria "physical injury," "degrades," or "function," just because you don't like it. Somehow, you think that's a "fact," where simply seeing the arrangement of words in that definition as they actually, clearly, exist in reality is an "opinion."

In any case, we're done here. Smoke actually wrote a post worth responding to a few pages back. I've wasted enough time on you.

This thread like the last one you opined on is trolling.

You think its mutilation, that is a bizarre opinion. Your opinion on this is borne from a real lack of any experience, and is dictated by extreme religious bias.

 

[beefheart]

If anyone can point to any reputable medical or mental health studies anywhere that define a vasectomy as mutilation, please, by all means, publish the links here.

I'll wait.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

Again, the simple fact of the matter is that, going by the objective definition of the word, surgical sterilization fits the criteria for being mutilation.

Some people dislike that, because it makes them feel "yucky" inside, apparently, and so they're trying to invent reasons why they shouldn't have to acknowledge that reality.

That's the thread in a nutshell. :shrug:

Then simply back up your claim. The fact you are missing is that if somebody doesn't feel it is mutilation their opinion is just as solid as yours. They are not "wrong". Some people feel a tattoo is mutilation, they are welcome to that opinion just like you are. The definition does not make either factually mutilation. This is why you can not answer my question.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&a mp;amp;a mp

The fact you are missing is that if somebody doesn't feel it is mutilation their opinion is just as solid as yours.

No, it's not. That's not how this works.

The definition of the word is the definition of a word regardless of how you or anyone else might happen to "feel" about it. No one cares how you "feel," quite frankly.

Again, "Mutilation" is defined as "doing damage to an organ in such a manner as to degrade its appearance or function." No where does that definition say anything about "but only if someone accepts that." You're the one trying to add unnecessary, "subjective," criteria here, not me.

They are not "wrong".

Factually, yes, they are.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&amp

No, it's not. That's not how this works.

The definition of the word is the definition of a word regardless of how you or anyone else might happen to "feel" about it. No one cares how you "feel," quite frankly.

Again, "Mutilation" is defined as "doing damage to an organ in such a manner as to degrade its appearance or function." No where does that definition say anything about "but only if someone accepts that." You're the one trying to add unnecessary criteria here, not me.



Factually, yes, they are.

The definition doesn't support your subjective criteria as fact. You are correct though nobody cares how you feel as the definition proves all you have is your opinion. They are not "factually" wrong that's a false claim. If they were you would be able to answer my question but you can't. Until you can your will continue to be wrong with your claims of "facts" hahaha

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation&a mp

The definition doesn't support your subjective criteria as fact.

Prove it. What "subjective criteria?" :roll:

You are correct though nobody cares how you feel as the definition proves all you have is your opinion. They are not "factually" wrong that's a false claim. If they were you would be able to answer my question but you can't. Until you can your will continue to be wrong with your claims of "facts" hahaha

Given the stated definition, they are factually wrong. I am factually correct. Period

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation

Prove it. What "subjective criteria?" :roll:



Given the stated definition, they are factually wrong. I am factually correct. Period

Already did with you dodging my question. YOU made the claim we asked you to support it and you can;t its you job to do so not ours hahaha. No the stated definition does not show they are factually wrong, you again are using YOUR subjective criteria . . period. We are still waiting for you to stop running and answer my question

"where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation

Already did with you dodging my question. YOU made the claim we asked you to support it and you can;t its you job to do so not ours hahaha. No the stated definition does not show they are factually wrong, you again are using YOUR subjective criteria . . period. We are still waiting for you to stop running and answer my question

"where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

Again, prove it. What "subjective criteria" are you referring to? How are they not "facts?" List them out, and list your grievances. :roll:

Otherwise, I will simply continue to repeat the following: Given the stated definition, my opponents are factually wrong. I am factually correct. Period.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutalaition

Again, prove it. What "subjective criteria" are you referring to? How are they not "facts?" List them out, and list your grievances. :roll:

Otherwise, I will simply continue to repeat the following: Given the stated definition, my opponents are factually wrong. I am factually correct. Period.

Repeat it all you want I will continue to repeat what I have been the whole time that you keep runnign from hahaha


"where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutalaition

Repeat it all you want I will continue to repeat what I have been the whole time that you keep runnign from hahaha


"where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

Again, prove it. What "criteria" are you referring to? What "definition?" How do you believe my criteria fail to meet that definition? How is my analysis not "factual," given all of the above?

List them out, and list your grievances.

Otherwise, I will simply continue to repeat the following: Given the stated definition, my opponents are factually wrong. I am factually correct. Period.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutalaition

Again, prove it. What "criteria" are you referring to? What "definition?" How do you believe my criteria fail to meet that definition? How is my analysis not "factual," given all of the above?

List them out, and list your grievances.

Otherwise, I will simply continue to repeat the following: Given the stated definition, my opponents are factually wrong. I am factually correct. Period.

"where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutalaition

"where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

Again, prove it. What "criteria" are you referring to? What "definition?" How do you believe my criteria fail to meet that definition? How is my analysis not "factual," given all of the above?

List list your grievances if you want me to address them.

Otherwise, I will simply continue to repeat the following: Given the stated definition, my opponents are factually wrong. I am factually correct. Period.

 

[LaylaWindu]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of Mutalaition

Again, prove it. What "criteria" are you referring to? What "definition?" How do you believe my criteria fail to meet that definition? How is my analysis not "factual," given all of the above?

List list your grievances if you want me to address them.

Otherwise, I will simply continue to repeat the following: Given the stated definition, my opponents are factually wrong. I am factually correct. Period.

where in the definition YOU posted is the criteria you are using?" Please simply point it out, should be easy if your claims are in fact true. Thank you.

 

[Gathomas88]

Re: Surgical Sterilization and the definition of "Mutilation"

I think I broke it. :lamo