His assertions are premises for why he holds my position as wrong. So, I choose to challenge those premises, i.e., his assertions. Do you believe that this is not a legitimate method of debate? Well, it’s the heart of debate. Assertions are made, questioned and supported. I’ve been on the other side of this for God knows how many threads, and have supplied my reasoning when asked.
I offer a shout-out to our highly esteemed moderator, tomndebb, with a “thanks” for providing a cite to a post that is but one example of that.
False. You made an assertion in your fist words of the thread. One you have yet to support in this or any thread where you’ve made it.
In Debate 001 when someone makes an assertion and provides some evidence for it {even inconclusive evidence} the burden is then on the opposing argument to make a rational point and offer their own evidence. You’ve countered with an assertion of your own and then failed to defend it. Instead you call for the OP to further elaborate on theirs. Why? The weight of the argument already supports the OP. Lacking any evidence or compelling argument to the contrary the debate is over and the OP isn’t required to defend or justify any further. I repeat, your calls for the OP to defend his assertions further only highlight your lack of evidence and rational argument.
I do happen to agree with the OP and have explained why offering my own arguments. I accept his assertions based on available evidence, history and reason. I’m perfectly willing to listen to reasonable opposing arguments and weigh any additional evidence. Thread after thread I’ve seen none. I’m pretty convinced at this point none exists but I remain open.
It’s fine for you to not accept the OPs assertions but what I think is telling is the fact you ask the OP for more evidence for his assertions while unable to provide any for your own. See, a poster normally mounts some kind of counter argument but when weighing assertion against assertion the one with **any evidence usually trumps the one with none at all **. That, friend, is how it works.
Right. Because the Black Knight always triumphs.
“I’ve cut your arms off”
“No you haven’t”
Sometimes denial is comical but this isn’t one of those times.
magellan01, I’m sorry* to disappoint you, but I didn’t start this thread about you or because I’m interested in debating you personally. The two Pit threads are most definitely about you.
You’ve overstated quite a bit. The thread is not about magellan01 or his beliefs. The OP was a specific question and request for clarification by the OP for anybody who opposed SSM. Let’s note that the request for specifics has been ignored.
that it was pointed out over and over [in that other thread] that the consequences would be two generations down the road?
or that calling for examples of things occurring two generations down the road is ridiculous?
Granted, #2 might be a bit more difficult, as we might have different views on the absurdity of time travel in 2009.
Are you kidding? That may happen, sure? But it is just s likely that a psoter will be grilled on a certain point with no alternative being offered. I know. I’ve been there on the other side.
Says you. This is exaclty the point. He, you, take his assertions to be fact. They’re not. I wish to show that weakness of his assertions. Once I offer answers, it will turn into to me defending my opinions and assertions against a dozen people. This is an opportunity to attack the foundation and show how shaky it is. Again all this proof, evidence, logic, enlightenment, righteousness versus little old me. And the battle will not be allowed. I declare win by forfeit due to cowardice!!!
I’m really laughing. You’re faulting me for the exact same thing I’m faulting the OP for, while giving him a pass. Whew!
Ooooohhhhhh. But you’re not open to having me examine and question his assertions and weigh whatever evidence he might offer. Only you get to do that with positions you disagree with. Gotcha. I’ll try to keep that in mind.
We’re on Page 3 now of the thread YOU started. In Post 6 I asked for support for various assertions that YOU listed in your very own OP. You have yet to do so.
If you would like to dispute his premise, I have a very simple way for you to go about that: Provide a specific example of a negative impact that gay marriage would have on American society as a whole.
I’m well aware of my options, but thanks. I’ll wait for him to answer what has been asked of him in Post 6. Otherwise it’ll turn into yet another thread of me on defense with a dozen or so people hyperfocusing on every word. Not that I mind that, but here I have another option which I’d like to explore. Let’s see how the OP does.
Nonsense. We routinely make predictions or speculate as to the future consequences of current actions. Since you seem reasonably certain that there will be consequences of legalizing SSM and using the term “marriage” to refer to same-sex unions, presumably you have some idea of what those consequences might be. Care to share?
That’s an amazing combination of pity party and ego trip, but it doesn’t answer the question.
Something bad will happen in about 40 years or 2 generations. No examples of what bad things will happen but they will happen.
Do you have ANY idea how ridiculous that is? Any idea at all?
We have a sort of running joke at work. It has to do with workplace safety, and designing safety into a system. We’ve decided it’s the safety guy’s job to simply run around waving his hands, yelling “I’m scared”.
He backed them up in the OP. You stepped in to make one you haven’t backed up ever and then to demand he offer further evidence.
Before you demand he offer additional evidence you should offer some kind of rebuttal argument other than “prove my evidence free assertion is wrong”
he doesn’t need any propping up and has not avoided any responsibility. He listed evidence in the OP with his assertions and asked a simple question which you have avoided.
Unless you have any evidence to counter his assertions and the evidence he’s already offered he’s under no obligation to meet your arbitrary demands.
What you’ve done is is state your disagreement with nothing to back it up and and rather than offer an opposing argument or answer the question posed, demand he provide additional evidence. It’s a hollow meaningless demand until you offer some support for an opposing argument. That’s how it works here and you know it.
That’s also not how it works in a public forum.
Here’s a request. Offer something substantial to support your argument or stop bringing it up. It’s a personal opinion based on nothing but your own feelings. That’s fine but leaves little to be debated in any meaningful way.
I pointed out that it was inapplicable and why. More than once now.
And I have no obligation to play the game you want me to play, especially when you’ve shown yourself to care nothing for fairness.
Fine. It would only work if he felt up to it and the throng would stay away anyway. He’s stated he’d rather not so that’s that. And I’m free to judge that as I choose.
I’ll bring it up whenever I feel like it. Based on your post a couple back, you would be one of the last people I would look to for “proper debating” advice. So I feel it really easy to ignore this. especially since I’ve commented on it already.
I, and several others, do not believe that you have adequately described what you believe those consequences might be. Where have you done so before? Cites, links?
magellan, can you describe the consequences for us? Just start in the easiest, most generalized terms. I promise that once I have a starting point, I’ll ask more specific questions and we can discuss the allegedly potentially negative consequences at length.
You don’t have to meet me halfway. One-sixteenth will do, for starters.