The Glade 4.0

Which may be a weakness in his position. I'm not addressing how solid his position is, just people intentionally misrepresenting it so they can blast the evil Republican.

His position is rather simple: He believes at life at conception, and the fact that it was a rape doesn't make it any less so. It's an any position to defend if you are so inclined.

Reporter: Mr Candidate, why are you against abortions for rape victims?
Canditate: It's not the baby's fault.

For whatever reason, he's incapable of a simple, direct response. He feels he needs to get into the weeds and where the reporters can paint him as an evil misogynist oppressor from the stone age. As a result there is much adieu about a relatively small amount of the abortions in this country. I'll admit that may make him a poor choice to communicate conservatism, but it doesn't make him an evil misogynist oppressor.

I'm still waiting for some one to invent the artificial womb and make this whole point moot.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Even in his 'clarification', he said that what he meant was that god intended the pregnancy to happen. But it happened because of a rape, and god has absolute power, so at the very least god allowed the rape to occur because he...wanted the pregnancy? Really? Of course it all sounds irrational because these are the type of semantic contortions you're reduced to when you're trying to define and justify a logically and morally inconsistent position. And don't bother with the whole free will thing, because either the buck stops with your god, or it doesn't. Stop trying to cop out.

And no Rori, this guy isn't evil, and he isn't a misogynist, and he isn't an oppressor, and him being a Republican is irrelevant. He's just stupid.

Your extrapolating his argument. Knock it off. "A=B". Then you take it futher: "Well, if A=B, and B=C, and C<D, then A<D. OMG, dude said "A<D"!!!" Except he didn't. He said A=B. You are correct as to the ramifications of his statement, based on your understanding of the relationship of these variables, but your making assumptions he is using the same "math" as you.

Either stick to what he said, and highlight the ramifications, or don't. But this BS where people are going around putting words in his mouth is dishonest.

Now, who ever said God has absolute power? Free will is not a "copout" it's the rules.

There is nothing more retarded than trying to rationalize someone else's religious beliefs.

FTFY.

Faith isn't rational.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

This is false. Perhaps this is a poor choice of words? "Rational" requires only reason and sensibility. It is not senseless and/or unreasonable to have faith.

Faith does not preclude rationality. However, it is not obtained or supported rationally. There are no rational arguments one can make to support it - that's part of what makes it faith. Most people are somewhat rational. Faith itself exists in spite of rationality.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

Yes, yes it is.

Faith has absolutely nothing to do with reason.

But it doesn't preclude reason. They're independent axes.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades

While that may be true, the positive faith negative reason area is the first quadrant in the coordinate system by population.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Faith is not reason, but it is connected to reason. People do not have faith in random, arbitrary beliefs.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

None of those people chose to believe in Scientology randomly, nor arbitrarily. My apologies for phrasing what I said poorly.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

What you choose to put your faith in can be rational. Faith itself (as used in every day language, trust or belief without proof) is not.

People who claim to "believe" in the Flying Spaghetti Monster do not choose that randomly either. They pick it because they think it makes them cool rebels against Christianity or some such nonsense.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster was invented for the purpose of arguing against creationism and intelligent design being taught in school. It serves this purpose fairly well, but people who actually adhere to it do so for the express purpose of exploiting religious tolerance provisions to get around rules, generally for no purpose other than to show that they can. Well-used, the FSM illustrates why science should be taught in science class. Beyond that it is a tool of the immature and insecure.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Thank you Mus. This stuff actually matters.

Yes, exactly right. So don't muddy the waters by misrepresenting what people actually believe, and get to the point. By putting words in someone's mouth, because it's easier to argue against, you're not furthering the debate. (directed as Mus).

Ok.

People who ignore the mountains of hard scientific evidence that contradicts and frankly shows how false their magic books are have no **** business being anywhere near positions of power that direct the course of this (or any other) country.

Is that to the point enough for you?

There are times where I just get the overwhelming feeling of not being able to wait so that we can see who is right and who is wrong.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

Good call so everyone who has a belief that cannot be tied to a scientific theory is hereby disenfranchised. I am 100% cool with that if we expand it out to include people who cannot read and/or did not finish high school.

2016 dream ticket:


WE BUHLEEF IN NUZZING LEBOWSKI!!

_________________

No argument there from me. Anyone who can't read/write or finished high school should be prevented from being in any government office.

The constituents are supposed to be holding the elected accountable. They don't do it or do a very good job of it it seems which is another issue altogether. Regardless, what a representative has personal faith in matters little. It's not necessarily true that their personal faith dictates what they do in office. Nor does it matter in many cases. There are many laws we have that could be religiously derived but we keep them, anyway. I think DE pointed this out a while ago.

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

That's not what I said is it?

_________________