“Libtard”? Oh, I get it, its substitution humor, you take a semi-funny line and render it stoopid, hoping that some sparse element of humor will remain? Rightard to libtard? Not exactly a knee-slapper, now is it?
You guys suck at funny. Might be better advised to just leave it alone.
does it bother you that somewhere there is a whole vilage looking for you?do you really think that saying I think 2+2=4 makes it just an opinion?
Two insulting posts in a row. Shows your ability to respond to the substance of what we are discussing.
That makes no sense. Some members of my fmily were killed by the Americans and others were tortured. I therefore support the overthrow of the US government by whatever means necessary. Does that make sense to anyone?
Or the lack of substance in your posts…
What if you said
"I therefore support the removal of US forces by whatever means necessary. "
Why did you feel it was necessary to single out one point as if it represented my whole post? That was awful disingenuous of you.
Look, all I’m saying is the unwavering refusal to see anything from any viewpoint other than your own reminds me of when I was a young, thickheaded teenager. As I matured and gained knowledge and life experience I realized that there really are at least two sides to every argument. I mean, do you guys really think we would be over there if it was a FACT that the war is senseless? WE think it’s senseless. I assure you that many, many other people think otherwise - even some Iraqis, even some liberals - and they believe they’re just as right as we believe we are. The worst of it all is that I don’t for one second think that any of you believe the war is “factually senseless.” I believe that you think saying so makes your argument stronger, but in my humble-know-nothing-makes-no-sense opinion it just weakens it.
How about kids involuntarily present at church? Because that’s how I spent every Sunday morning of my childhood.
Not at a government-run church, you weren’t.
You show me where in Bricker’s comment, the one that I quoted, where he said anything about the government.
Children are forced to attend school by the government. They are forced to attend church by their parents. It’s a different kind of “involuntary.”
It’s involuntary. That’s the word he used. That’s the word I used. You are free to argue with him.
I don’t need to argue with him…I knew what he meant all along.
You’re referring to “You guys are all stupid” and “libtards”, right?
You’re right, I should have said “two posts that are only insulting.” My insulting posts actually responded to the substance of what we were discussing, unlike theirs.
Review the above:
Luc said that if a person breaks apart words sufficiently — perhaps lifting them from context or using them equivocally — almost anything, like the attack on Pearl Harbor, could be made into an opinion rather than a fact. But, he continued, Pearl Harbor actually is a fact.
Your response was to ask him what he meant by stating that Pearl Harbor is an opinion, and you declared that Pearl Harbor can be objectively tested for truth. You responded this way despite the fact that his dependent clause (“Parse your words carefully enough…”) made his statement a conditional one. He said in effect the opposite of how you parsed it, which effectively proved his point.
I suppose I shouldn’t have called you an idiot, but I’m just sick and tired of being sick and tired about dealing with stupid people. The presidential race had the effect of gathering so many of them together into tight quarters — such as at Sarah Palin rallies.
I know what she feels though. I’ve heard about John McCain supporters, I know they exist, but to see one in person… amazing. It’s like seeing a panda bear in the wild, it’s just something you don’t see all that often. 
Yes, but it’s the fallacy of equivocation: when the same word has two different meanings or contexts:
In this case, parents exercise choices on their childrens’ behalf, or few six-year-olds would get vaccination shots. So while church attendance may be “involuntary” with respect to the child, it’s voluntary with respect to the child’s guardian. School attendance, on the other hand, is compulsory for the child by reason of the fact that it’s mandatory for the guardians to ensure that their kid goes to school.
Speak for yourself.
The word doesn’t have two different meanings.
The guardian doesn’t have to send the child to school. Many guardians don’t. Most choose to send their kids to school, but not all.
And either way, the kids have no options.