Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The official "wil won, hooray!" thread The official "wil won, hooray!" thread

12-08-2016 , 06:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlwaysFolding
And it continues!
Yes, I agree, it continues. Snappy comeback by the way.
12-08-2016 , 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
They're generalizing Islam based on a relatively small fraction of adherents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
lol. Only a ****ing fool would think this. Islam/Islamic countries are the absolute worst on the planet when it comes to treatment of women and gay rights. Large percentages of Muslims hold awful beliefs.

Hahahhahah. Hahahahahaha. Like, we have the data, dude. We have the Pew polls, we see the evidence. How could you possibly justify your statement?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
Is this the part where I pwn you and then you ignore me again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
Or is the part where you show you can't follow a simple conversation?

Are we talking about women/homosexual rights now or still terrorism?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
You've never owned me in anything. You are a ****ing idiot that I get tired of explaining trivial **** to. Having the same argument over and over again bores me. You've never made one point that I've actually had to think about, as you've just proven again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
...


I'm entirely convinced you have me confused with somebody else.

Our main interaction is me calling your bluff about the come-to-philly and black-friends bets, that mightv'e been the straw on the camel's back that led to your Politics exile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
I don't have you confused with anyone else, and I'm pretty sure if you actually did come and meet my black friends they would defend me vigorously. The conversation wouldn't go well for your argument.

It's a moot point, as I'd have zero interest in meeting you. You seem like a total waste of time.

lul


Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
Also, they've quite clearly stated all muslims are bad, 'violent' religion, yada yada, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
You're just an idiot. I've never, not once, said this. I've said multiple times some of the best people I've ever met were Muslims.

I have, however, said that Islam, in general, is a violent religion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
wil, we're gonna do a choose-your-own-adventure with this one:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive View Post
Also, they've quite clearly stated all muslims are bad, 'violent' religion, yada yada, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
You're just an idiot. I've never, not once, said this. I've said multiple times some of the best people I've ever met were Muslims.

I have, however, said that Islam, in general, is a violent religion.

1.

Spoiler:







Is violence bad?









2.

Spoiler:

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deuces McKracken View Post
Islam is not a bad religion, relatively speaking.

...
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
No intelligent, logical person could believe this statement.



Choose wisely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
No, I choose not to. Your posts are worthless to me at this point. Even if I would argue with you, I don't understand half of your posts anyway.

Congrats, you are now 50% of my ignore list. Have fun spewing whatever you are spewing, but know that I will not be an active part of it.
12-08-2016 , 10:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZMountainHiker
Yes, I agree, it continues. Snappy comeback by the way.
shhhh nobody tell him that the jokes on him
12-09-2016 , 12:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
Just confirming your intellectual dishonesty.
Are you saying that Republicans weren't trying to strip PP of funding because of abortion?

So it's just about hating women then? If you say so.
12-09-2016 , 12:28 AM
As an aside: why should taxpayers fund abortion when a substantial portion of them think it's equivalent to murdering a just-out-of-the-womb child (which it is, morally, for late term abortions which the mother could easily carry to term)?

If women want to kill their children, let them pay for it. The idea that you can just kill another human life - one that already has feelings and sensations - with zero cost or consequence is pretty bizarre. Making people who find it abhorrent pay for it is pretty bad.
12-09-2016 , 12:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlwaysFolding
shhhh nobody tell him that the jokes on him
No, the joke is actually on you....the funny thing is that you don't get it...
12-09-2016 , 01:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSayer
As an aside: why should taxpayers fund abortion when a substantial portion of them think it's equivalent to murdering a just-out-of-the-womb child (which it is, morally, for late term abortions which the mother could easily carry to term)?

If women want to kill their children, let them pay for it. The idea that you can just kill another human life - one that already has feelings and sensations - with zero cost or consequence is pretty bizarre. Making people who find it abhorrent pay for it is pretty bad.
While I somewhat agree with you here, do you feel the same way about the death penalty? Public funds finance it, no?

I have trouble separating these things out. Say if I wouldn't want my tax money to go to making nuclear weapons, but I don't know how to take a position on it.
12-09-2016 , 11:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZMountainHiker
No, the joke is actually on you....the funny thing is that you don't get it...
I feel like you never out-grew the game of shadow as evidenced by your inability to do anything but try and use my own commentary on me.

-1 for effort my racist child. -1.
12-09-2016 , 12:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
While I somewhat agree with you here, do you feel the same way about the death penalty? Public funds finance it, no?

I have trouble separating these things out. Say if I wouldn't want my tax money to go to making nuclear weapons, but I don't know how to take a position on it.
This is a bit off topic...but is the death penalty a Dem or Republican thing?

I voted to repeal it here in California but it seems like it never had a chance to get repealed. And then you have Texas, a red state, with the most executions and I think was the first state to pass the law. Is it just a non-partisan thing?
12-09-2016 , 12:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabby Hayes
This is a bit off topic...but is the death penalty a Dem or Republican thing?

I voted to repeal it here in California but it seems like it never had a chance to get repealed. And then you have Texas, a red state, with the most executions and I think was the first state to pass the law. Is it just a non-partisan thing?
It's a Republican thing, in general. There are some democrats who are against. I'm against it in principal, but I am not comfortable telling others what they should do. It's probably the most complicated issue there is.
12-09-2016 , 12:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlwaysFolding
I feel like you never out-grew the game of shadow as evidenced by your inability to do anything but try and use my own commentary on me.

-1 for effort my racist child. -1.
Typical libtard response, you can't have an intelligent conversation so you call me a racist. You forgot to add homophobe and sexist in there too. I actually kinda feel bad and sorry for you.
12-09-2016 , 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZMountainHiker
Typical libtard response, you can't have an intelligent conversation so you call me a racist. You forgot to add homophobe and sexist in there too. I actually kinda feel bad and sorry for you.
LOL

Too easy man. Ignorance really is bliss.
12-09-2016 , 01:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
It's a Republican thing, in general. There are some democrats who are against. I'm against it in principal, but I am not comfortable telling others what they should do. It's probably the most complicated issue there is.
Logically, it should be one of the least complicated issues.

Put aside for the moment that innocent people have most likely been put to death (a strong argument against in and of itself); the reasoning behind 'X is so wrong, if you do it, we'll do X to you' is dubious at best.
12-09-2016 , 02:07 PM
It's not uncomplicated at all. I have no problem with the government finding that someone has done something so awful that they only recourse is to take their life. However, even a cursory examination of the realities of death sentence cases makes it clear that we use it to kill poor minority people, until that changes I can't really support it.
12-09-2016 , 02:41 PM
I remember having to write an essay in 3rd grade on the Death penalty. We had to pick a side and argue for or against. This was during the 88 election when it was a huge issue.

Can you imagine having 8 year olds tackle this subject in school now? My, how times have changed.
12-09-2016 , 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabby Hayes
This is a bit off topic...but is the death penalty a Dem or Republican thing?

I voted to repeal it here in California but it seems like it never had a chance to get repealed. And then you have Texas, a red state, with the most executions and I think was the first state to pass the law. Is it just a non-partisan thing?
How do Brits know this but you, an American, don't?
12-09-2016 , 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
It's a Republican thing, in general. There are some democrats who are against. I'm against it in principal, but I am not comfortable telling others what they should do. It's probably the most complicated issue there is.
What's complicated about it? (Naive Canadian questions, I know. Humour me.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabby Hayes
I remember having to write an essay in 3rd grade on the Death penalty. We had to pick a side and argue for or against. This was during the 88 election when it was a huge issue.

Can you imagine having 8 year olds tackle this subject in school now? My, how times have changed.
I assume you mean changed for the worse. Do you think life was better in 1988? (I was born in 84 so I don't remember anything beyond sesame street from the 80's.)
12-09-2016 , 02:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jalfrezi
How do Brits know this but you, an American, don't?
I knew it's been predominantly a conservative stance in years past. But nowadays it seems to me both sides are for it. It never really came up during this election cycle. And I would guess it boils down to $ that both sides benefit from it.
12-09-2016 , 03:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by auralex14
Logically, it should be one of the least complicated issues.

Put aside for the moment that innocent people have most likely been put to death (a strong argument against in and of itself); the reasoning behind 'X is so wrong, if you do it, we'll do X to you' is dubious at best.
What makes it complicated is because it's hard to be philosophically consistent either side you choose. I don't believe that the government should be able to tell you what to do, in general. I also don't believe an embryo is a human being. I can't define on what day that embryo does become a human being. Therefore I can't define when an abortion is actually murder.

Also, lives are lost every day to other causes. If preventing death is our #1 goal, then we can change many many things to help achieve that. For example, we knew for a fact that lowering the speed limit will save lives. That isn't up for debate. The question is how many deaths are acceptable to us because we want to drive over 55 miles an hour?

If you believe life starts at conception and don't support the death penalty, then maybe I can understand you saying it's an easy choice. I'm not in that boat, so for me it's a gut-wrenching debate and one I do not really wish to explore. It makes me sad and angry and every other emotion, I just try to avoid it.
12-09-2016 , 03:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oroku$aki
I assume you mean changed for the worse. Do you think life was better in 1988? (I was born in 84 so I don't remember anything beyond sesame street from the 80's.)
The access to information provides for a much better opportunity at educating oneself now. As far as the socio-political climate in the education system being much better, I really don't know. Probably better and worse in certain areas. I don't have any kids so I can't speak from personal experience.
12-09-2016 , 04:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
What makes it complicated is because it's hard to be philosophically consistent either side you choose. I don't believe that the government should be able to tell you what to do, in general. I also don't believe an embryo is a human being. I can't define on what day that embryo does become a human being. Therefore I can't define when an abortion is actually murder.

Also, lives are lost every day to other causes. If preventing death is our #1 goal, then we can change many many things to help achieve that. For example, we knew for a fact that lowering the speed limit will save lives. That isn't up for debate. The question is how many deaths are acceptable to us because we want to drive over 55 miles an hour?

If you believe life starts at conception and don't support the death penalty, then maybe I can understand you saying it's an easy choice. I'm not in that boat, so for me it's a gut-wrenching debate and one I do not really wish to explore. It makes me sad and angry and every other emotion, I just try to avoid it.
I'm at a similar viewpoint on the Death Penalty. I'm against it for the sole reason that there is just too many innocent lives railroaded by corruption in the system. I also happen to believe Life without Parole is a harsher punishment than Death anyway.

But I also see circumstances that having the threat of the Death Penalty in place can be a good thing for leverage. For example, the family of victims that would rather have a speedy process and move on, they can agree to accept a plea of Life Without Parole instead of having to go through a tough trial for the Death Penalty. On the flip side though, that leverage can be a danger to actual innocent people that plea down to Life, just to avoid getting the Death Penalty. It is pretty damn complex. Jeez.
12-09-2016 , 04:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
What makes it complicated is because it's hard to be philosophically consistent either side you choose. I don't believe that the government should be able to tell you what to do, in general. I also don't believe an embryo is a human being. I can't define on what day that embryo does become a human being. Therefore I can't define when an abortion is actually murder.
There are many areas where we have to somewhat arbitrarily draw a line eg the age of consent. It's illogical that having sex with someone aged 15 years 364 days is rape but on their 16th birthday it's consensual sex (UK example), but there is no sensible alternative.
12-09-2016 , 04:12 PM
Yes but we can agree one is more final than the other. That one day is the difference between life and death.
12-09-2016 , 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jalfrezi
There are many areas where we have to somewhat arbitrarily draw a line eg the age of consent. It's illogical that having sex with someone aged 15 years 364 days is rape but on their 16th birthday it's consensual sex (UK example), but there is no sensible alternative.
Sliding scale punishment by age is not better in theory? Why is this not implemented?
12-09-2016 , 04:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlwaysFolding
LOL

Too easy man. Ignorance really is bliss.
Are you in the "special" class? Serious question, I'm just curious...

      
m