# Shodan, please lay out your case here. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 3, 2006, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212 "2006-01-03T14:12:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/41 "2006-01-04T04:35:56Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > No, but if the government is based on Christian values, it does. What does a government, particular the legislative branch do? It legislates. But that doesn’t require “imposing” Christian values, unless you assume that “Christian values” can’t include freedom of religion for non-Christians. But I see that you’re leaving the thread, so I’ll shut up now! ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/42 "2006-01-04T05:09:05Z")
> [@](#): > > **John Mace** : The gist of the contract is to take power back from the government and give it to families. Does anyone else see anything strange in that concept anyway? Whatever happened to the power of the individual? The word _family_ when coupled with _values_ or _faith_ has come to have a meaning of its own. It’s a buzz word. A signal. A subtle suggestion. It may be disregarded if one chooses. But it is not a lie to interpret it as suggesting pro-Christian, pro-life, pro-prayer in schools, anti-SSM. **LHoD** , yes I think you were right on this one. But I’ve not seen **Shodan** like this in a long, long time. Maybe something is really bugging him. ---
**Author:** ![Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d07c76/32.png) [@Age\_Quod\_Agis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Age_Quod_Agis)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/43 "2006-01-04T05:24:36Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > There’s an important difference here between what \*\*AQA \*\*did and what \*\*LHoD \*\*did. > > \*\*LHoD \*\*specifically said he was paraphrasing, and he didn’t put his paraphrase in quotes. Now, I think his paraphrase sucks, but that’s a differnt issue. He did, afterall, say it was filtered thru his pinko glasses. > > \*\*AQA \*\*didn’t say he was paraphrasing, and he put his paraphrase in quotes. It should have been obvious to everyone that he was paraphrasing, but still, you don’t put something in quotes unless you’re actually quoting the original. (The exception might be if you’re using quotes in a different way-- ie, to communicate that your using a term or phrase losely.) He’s right. I intended to use the quotes to indicate that I was being facetious, but it obviously just mucked things up pretty bad. I’m an idiot. I apologize. I’ll try to remember to never do it again. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/44 "2006-01-04T05:49:58Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > Does anyone else see anything strange in that concept anyway? Whatever happened to the power of the individual? The word _family_ when coupled with _values_ or _faith_ has come to have a meaning of its own. It’s a buzz word. A signal. A subtle suggestion. > > It may be disregarded if one chooses. > > But it is not a lie to interpret it as suggesting pro-Christian, pro-life, pro-prayer in schools, anti-SSM. There’s only one minor problem with your thesis. The CWA has absolutely no provisions geared toward Christianity, abortion (or anti-abortion), prayer in school, or SSM. You can imagine it if you like, but it’s not in the text. You could probably squeeze some anti- sex education out of #4, but that’s about it. That represents maybe 2% of the CWA. It’s actually a lot simpler than that. Republicans like to market themselves as pro-family and they like to market Democrats as anti-family. For example: Republicans (supposedly) will give you a tax break so Mom can stay home with the kids if she wants. Democrats will raise your taxes to proved day-care, but that forces Mom to work whether she wants to or not. Republicans want to repeal the “marriage tax”. Democrats don’t care whether marriage caries a tax or not. n.b.: Don’t ask me to defend that, I’m just reporting it. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/45 "2006-01-04T13:30:23Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > There’s only one minor problem with your thesis. The CWA has absolutely no provisions geared toward Christianity, abortion (or anti-abortion), prayer in school, or SSM. This is pretty much it. The Contract with America does not say what Daniel claims it did. If a Republican had done what he did, he would be screaming bloody murder. But when he does it, it’s just a paraphrase. _:shrugs:_ I’ve been rather busy at work, so I have not had the chance to post as much as I would like. Sorry if any of this looked like a drive-by, but fortunately **John Mace** and **Weirddave** are here to pick up the slack. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/46 "2006-01-04T13:35:36Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I’ve been rather busy at work, so I have not had the chance to post as much as I would like. Sorry if any of this looked like a drive-by, but fortunately **John Mace** and **Weirddave** are here to pick up the slack. > > Regards, > Shodan I’m not sure John Mace is saying what you think he is saying. > [@John Mace](#): > > As I said earlier, this all started, not because of a paraphrase, but because of a misquote. Big difference. AQA may have thought he was paraphrasing, but he didn’t say he was, and he put his (undeclared) paraphrase in quotes. That’s not equivalent in any way to what LHoD did. This thread isn’t about the contract with america. It’s about your attempt at a gotcha moment on LHOD. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/47 "2006-01-04T13:43:43Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > This is pretty much it. The Contract with America does not say what Daniel claims it did. > > If a Republican had done what he did, he would be screaming bloody murder. But when he does it, it’s just a paraphrase. Ah, the hypothetical condemnation, one of **Shodan’s** staples. Can I play? If a Democrat had started the war in Iraq, **Shodan** would have become a stripper in a seedy joint in Taipei. Hey, that’s fun! It absolves me of the need to argue based on what’s actually happened–when I argue about what hasn’t happened, anything goes! Again, the Contract does not explicitly say that they’re going to build a government on Christian values. I believe, for the reasons I cited above, that this is a perfectly valid inference from the noted phrase in the CwA. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/48 "2006-01-04T13:50:30Z")
> [@Age Quod Agis](#): > > He’s right. I intended to use the quotes to indicate that I was being facetious, but it obviously just mucked things up pretty bad. I’m an idiot. I apologize. I’ll try to remember to never do it again. Fair enough, **AQA**. As I said before, I think you had a good point re: Kennedy’s response being pretty lame. I just didn’t like how you supported it :). Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/49 "2006-01-04T14:01:24Z")
> [@Harborwolf](#): > > This thread isn’t about the contract with america. Actually, yes it is. > [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > It absolves me of the need to argue based on what’s actually happened–when I argue about what hasn’t happened, anything goes! You’ve never condemned anyone for mischaracterizing a position? > [@](#): > > Again, the Contract does not explicitly say that they’re going to build a government on Christian values. I believe, for the reasons I cited above, that this is a perfectly valid inference from the noted phrase in the CwA. Right, we already got that part - it’s OK when you do it. In the same way, it is a perfectly valid inference that Democrats support terrorism, that Kerry lied about his service record, the ACLU wants to ban Christianity, etc., etc. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/50 "2006-01-04T14:03:56Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Actually, yes it is.You’ve never condemned anyone for mischaracterizing a position? No. I’m condemning you right this very second, for example, for mischaracterizing my position. You apparently find it much easier to argue with the voices in your head than with real people. > [@](#): > > Right, we already got that part - it’s OK when you do it. Does ANYONE here besides **Shodan** think this is an accurate characterization either of what I’m saying or of what I’m doing? Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/51 "2006-01-04T15:46:25Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Does ANYONE here besides **Shodan** think this is an accurate characterization either of what I’m saying or of what I’m doing? Well, recapping the scoring here at halftime, we find: Five posters essentially agreeing with **LHoD**. Two posters agreeing with **Shodan**. Four posters ragging on **Shodan** in general. Six posters making peripheral points or engaging in genial wordplay. Viewing the action from up here in the broadcast booth, I’d say **Shodan’s** got his work cut out for him in the second half. We’ll need to see a more focused defense plus much better support from the bench. Hope this helps. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/52 "2006-01-04T16:02:26Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Two posters agreeing with **Shodan**. That would be **Weirddave** and who? ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/53 "2006-01-04T16:18:30Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > That would be **Weirddave** and who? You know, I think if you actually read what I said, I haven’t offered word one about anyone’s position on the CWA, I merely clarified what I thought Shodan was upset about. Nobody has asked me about how I feel about Daniel’s CWA paraphrase, and I viewed it as a side issue when I was making my previous posts. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/54 "2006-01-04T16:19:28Z")
So that would be _zero_ posters agreeing with **Shodan**. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/55 "2006-01-04T16:20:41Z")
I could be wrong, but as I read **Weirddave** and **John Mace** , while neither of them may agree with my paraphrase of the CwA, neither of them has suggested that there was anything dishonest about my paraphrase, either. When asked what was dishonest about my paraphrase, **Weirddave** said, “I dunno. You’ll have to ask Shodan.” As such, **Shodan’s** alone, as near as I can tell, in claiming that I’m a “fucking liar.” I suppose that’s the burden of being an intellectual maverick and free-thinker. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/56 "2006-01-04T17:06:12Z")
**WeirdDave** , I got that you were just attempting to translate a position, and not defend it - I’m a careful reader 🙂 . **Shodan** - who do you think you’re fooling? Really? Who do you think is buying this? **Clothahump** , are you in here? What’s your take? ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/57 "2006-01-04T17:39:04Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > This is pretty much it. The Contract with America does not say what Daniel claims it did. If you feel this way, why did you not debate his _acknowledged_ interpretation in the original thread, instead of stalking him around the boards and sniping with accusations of dishonesty, buffed up with your own _unacknowledged_ embellishments? Because as far as I can see, there’s only one answer, which is that you’re being a coward. The fact that you choose to hide behind **Weirddave** and **John Mace** , who are respectively merely explaining your position and debating in good faith about reasonable interpretations of the CWA, merely confirms it. **LHoD** has readily acknowledged that his interpretations are his own, and been willing to debate them (heck, this thread is practically _begging_ you to do so). You, on the other hand, have yet to even acknowledge your earlier misrepresentations as such, let alone try and justify them. I know exactly who’s being dishonest here, and it’s not **LHoD**. Oh, but I’m sorry; this is all reducible to US partisan politics, and the _cough_ fact that as a Republican, you are persecuted on this board. My mistake. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/58 "2006-01-04T17:55:12Z")
> [@Dead Badger](#): > > I know exactly who’s being dishonest here, and it’s not **LHoD**. I remember as a kid realizing that folks tend to see in other folks what they’ve got int themselves. It was many years later that I learned the word “projection.” I don’t know whether everyone does it, but certainly some do it more than others. **Shodan** is Lord High Emperor of Projection. If Projection were an Olympic sport, there’d be constant calls for him to undergo steroids tests. Near as I can tell, he views the world in an extraordinarily partisan fashion, and therefore believes that his political opponents must do the same thing. He debates dishonestly, and so he believes that his oiltical opponents must do the same thing. He commits the very sin that he condemns others for, and so he believes that others must do the same thing. He takes projection to a meta level. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/59 "2006-01-04T17:56:07Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I’ve been rather busy at work, so I have not had the chance to post as much as I would like. Sorry if any of this looked like a drive-by, but fortunately **John Mace** and **Weirddave** are here to pick up the slack. There are two points of contention here. Whether or not \*\*LHoD \*\*accurately paraphrased the CWA is debateable. Reasonable people can hold different opinions about that. He put enough caveats on his paraphrase that I have no problem just seeing it as his opinion. Besides, that was just one line of the CWA, not the whole thing. And, frankly, your representation of his paraphrase was sloppy at best, dishonest at worst. You not only took it out of context, but deleted the crtical part of the CWA which he was referring to. So, no, I’m not picking up any slack here. The other issue, which is what started this whole thing, was the proper way to paraphrase so that it’s not interpreted as a quote. \*\*LHoD \*\*did that exactly as one should-- he explicitly called it a paraphrase, didn’t put it in quotes, and said it was a lefty’s opinion to boot. The other paraphrase, from \*\*AQA \*\*was sloppy and he has come here to admit it. His paraphrase \*\*did \*\*look like a misquote. I haven’t debtate with \*\*AQA \*\*that much, but my recollection is that he’s been an honest debater, so I take him at his word when he says it was unintentional. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212/60 "2006-01-04T18:01:20Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > oiltical opponents Now **that’s** a weird typo. Teach me to type while I look out the window. Political opponents, natch. Daniel [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shodan-please-lay-out-your-case-here/338212.md?page=4)