| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Warnock" |
| Date: |
15 Feb 2004 11:16:24 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9486AFBBE18A4keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.17...
of course you do. intersting that you bother to deny it.
Submit evidence.
sure. your position forces women to remain pregnant against their will.
****** Nothing wrong with that, they used up their FREE CHOICE, when they
slept with a man!
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat
you with experience."
--
**** The fact that the greatest scientists, to their utter dismay, can't
breath life into a dead body or create a perfect animal and breath life into
it - is PROOF of a higher intelligence! ****
** People who deny that there is a God, are not so convinced that no God
exists, but are using this denial as a crutch to get out of having to comply
with God's Law!**
.
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
15 Feb 2004 02:24:31 PM |
|
|
"Warnock" <warnnock@pop.co.za> wrote in
news:c0ojpm$4i0$27@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9486AFBBE18A4keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.17...
of course you do. intersting that you bother to deny it.
Submit evidence.
sure. your position forces women to remain pregnant against their will.
****** Nothing wrong with that
so you admit you are comfortable enslaving woman and forcing them to do your
will.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Plasmatron" |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
16 Feb 2004 05:53:44 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism james g. keegan jr. <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
"Warnock" <warnnock@pop.co.za> wrote in
news:c0ojpm$4i0$27@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9486AFBBE18A4keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.17...
of course you do. intersting that you bother to deny it.
Submit evidence.
sure. your position forces women to remain pregnant against their will.
****** Nothing wrong with that
so you admit you are comfortable enslaving woman and forcing them to do your
will.
You should not take his words out of context and attack a strawman.
It makes you look bad, especially when it is so utterly unnecessary.
His actual words are weak enough as is.
--
The Left Reverend Plasmatron at hotpop com
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think"
- Niels Bohr
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
16 Feb 2004 07:25:37 AM |
|
|
The Plasmatron <plasmatron@sickof.spam> wrote in
news:c0qb08$2i2$5@coward.ks.cc.utah.edu:
In alt.atheism james g. keegan jr. <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
"Warnock" <warnnock@pop.co.za> wrote in
news:c0ojpm$4i0$27@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9486AFBBE18A4keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.17...
of course you do. intersting that you bother to deny it.
Submit evidence.
sure. your position forces women to remain pregnant against their
will.
****** Nothing wrong with that
so you admit you are comfortable enslaving woman and forcing them to do
your will.
You should not take his words out of context and attack a strawman.
nor did i do that.
his position forces women to remain pregnant against their will.
he submits that there is "Nothing wrong with that."
would you care to define your "out of context" comment.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Plasmatron" |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
18 Feb 2004 04:28:01 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism james g. keegan jr. <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
The Plasmatron <plasmatron@sickof.spam> wrote in
news:c0qb08$2i2$5@coward.ks.cc.utah.edu:
In alt.atheism james g. keegan jr. <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
"Warnock" <warnnock@pop.co.za> wrote in
news:c0ojpm$4i0$27@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9486AFBBE18A4keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.17...
of course you do. intersting that you bother to deny it.
Submit evidence.
sure. your position forces women to remain pregnant against their
will.
****** Nothing wrong with that
so you admit you are comfortable enslaving woman and forcing them to do
your will.
You should not take his words out of context and attack a strawman.
nor did i do that.
his position forces women to remain pregnant against their will.
he submits that there is "Nothing wrong with that."
would you care to define your "out of context" comment.
Cutting him off in mid sentence is certainly out of context. Cutting
off my first sentence from any supporting statements is also out of
context, though to far less a degree. If you do not include qualifying
and/or supporting statements then you're not attacking what was actually
said, only a subset - hence the strawman refrence.
--
The Left Reverend Plasmatron at hotpop com
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think"
- Niels Bohr
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
18 Feb 2004 06:15:34 AM |
|
|
The Plasmatron <plasmatron@sickof.spam> wrote in
news:c0venh$aj3$1@coward.ks.cc.utah.edu:
In alt.atheism james g. keegan jr. <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
The Plasmatron <plasmatron@sickof.spam> wrote in
news:c0qb08$2i2$5@coward.ks.cc.utah.edu:
In alt.atheism james g. keegan jr. <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
"Warnock" <warnnock@pop.co.za> wrote in
news:c0ojpm$4i0$27@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9486AFBBE18A4keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.17...
of course you do. intersting that you bother to deny it.
Submit evidence.
sure. your position forces women to remain pregnant against their
will.
****** Nothing wrong with that
so you admit you are comfortable enslaving woman and forcing them to
do your will.
You should not take his words out of context and attack a
strawman.
nor did i do that.
his position forces women to remain pregnant against their will.
he submits that there is "Nothing wrong with that."
would you care to define your "out of context" comment.
Cutting him off in mid sentence is certainly out of context.
nor did i do that. i suspect that is why you did not support your
allegation.
Cutting off my first sentence from any supporting statements is also out
of context, though to far less a degree.
are you complaining that i corrected your error where it occurred rather
than elsewhere?
If you do not include qualifying and/or supporting statements then
you're not attacking what was actually said, only a subset - hence the
strawman refrence.
you're mistaken again recommended usenet convention is to include only
those remarks you are commenting upon. this is common knowledge and
something most people who have been posting for a week or more are well
aware of.
would you like me to point you to a usenet beginner's guide?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
15 Feb 2004 09:41:28 PM |
|
|
"Warnock" <warnnock@pop.co.za> wrote in message news:<c0ojpm$4i0$27@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>...
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9486AFBBE18A4keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.17...
of course you do. intersting that you bother to deny it.
Submit evidence.
sure. your position forces women to remain pregnant against their will.
****** Nothing wrong with that, they used up their FREE CHOICE, when they
slept with a man!
And now they have another choice, whether or not to continue their
pregnancy to term. Just because they had sex does not require them to
continue any resulting pregnancy to term. They can get an abortion is
they so desire. The choice is theirs, not yours.
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat
you with experience."
Sorry, but as long as idiots like you keep spouting chauvinistic,
bigotted comments and supporting an agenda designed to reduce, limit,
or take away people's personal, human, and civil freedoms, those of us
with intelligence and education will keep countering them, and
defending those freedoms.
Mark Sebree
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Plasmatron" |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
16 Feb 2004 06:00:00 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism Warnock <warnnock@pop.co.za> wrote:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9486AFBBE18A4keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.17...
of course you do. intersting that you bother to deny it.
Submit evidence.
sure. your position forces women to remain pregnant against their will.
****** Nothing wrong with that, they used up their FREE CHOICE, when they
slept with a man!
Since I don't have the rest of your debate to look at I'll hope that
you've already excluded rape, incest, and other forms of coercion,
otherwise you're obviously wrong from the get go.
So, now we just have the fact that until there is some brain
development you're dealing with just a mass of cells, not a human
being, so why shouldn't a woman have the right to have the little
parasite removed if she doesn't want it to eventually become a
human being?
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat
you with experience."
Good advice, but I'll argue with you anyway. I am doing this for
pure entertainment, not social status.
--
**** The fact that the greatest scientists, to their utter dismay, can't
breath life into a dead body or create a perfect animal and breath life into
it - is PROOF of a higher intelligence! ****
** People who deny that there is a God, are not so convinced that no God
exists, but are using this denial as a crutch to get out of having to comply
with God's Law!**
--
The Left Reverend Plasmatron at hotpop com
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think"
- Niels Bohr
.
|
|
|
| User: "Warnock" |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
20 Feb 2004 10:20:18 AM |
|
|
"The Plasmatron" <plasmatron@sickof.spam> wrote in message
news:c0qbc0$2i2$6@coward.ks.cc.utah.edu...
****** Nothing wrong with that, they used up their FREE CHOICE, when
they
slept with a man!
Since I don't have the rest of your debate to look at I'll hope that
you've already excluded rape, incest, and other forms of coercion,
otherwise you're obviously wrong from the get go.
****** The only really good reason to go to a foetus abattoir, is to save
the woman's life! But, secondary reasons may include rape & coercion.
So, now we just have the fact that until there is some brain
development you're dealing with just a mass of cells, not a human
being, so why shouldn't a woman have the right to have the little
parasite removed if she doesn't want it to eventually become a
human being?
****** Well to start with it's God's creation - appologies to atheists!
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat
you with experience."
Good advice, but I'll argue with you anyway. I am doing this for
pure entertainment, not social status.
****** You are welcome, at least you are civil! Might even make a theist out
of you yet.::))
--
**** The fact that the greatest scientists, to their utter dismay, can't
breath life into a dead body or create a perfect animal and breath life into
it - is PROOF of a higher intelligence! ****
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you
with experience."
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
20 Feb 2004 05:45:11 PM |
|
|
"Warnock" <warnnock@pop.co.za> wrote in
news:c15mh4$68c$21@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net:
****** The only really good reason to go to a foetus abattoir, is to
save the woman's life! But, secondary reasons may include rape &
coercion.
or any other reason the pregnant woman decides is relevant.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Plasmatron" |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
20 Feb 2004 05:43:55 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism Warnock <warnnock@pop.co.za> wrote:
"The Plasmatron" <plasmatron@sickof.spam> wrote in message
news:c0qbc0$2i2$6@coward.ks.cc.utah.edu...
****** Nothing wrong with that, they used up their FREE CHOICE, when
they
slept with a man!
Since I don't have the rest of your debate to look at I'll hope that
you've already excluded rape, incest, and other forms of coercion,
otherwise you're obviously wrong from the get go.
****** The only really good reason to go to a foetus abattoir, is to save
the woman's life! But, secondary reasons may include rape & coercion.
Oh BS. Why not end it's life? Before it has a brain how can it
possibly have a mind or a soul living in it yet? What good reason is
there to force a woman to keep it growing inside her until it does grow a
brain? Is there something that gives little lumps of flesh a right to
turn into a child? If so why does God choose to cause more than 50% of
pregnancies to miscarry, the vast majority so early on that the woman
probably didn't even realize she was pregnant? If not then why should a
woman's right to end a pregnancy be curtailed?
Also if little lumps of cells with no brain have rights then where
does it end? Does every egg cell in every woman have a right to be
fertilized? Does every sperm have a right to combine with an egg?
So, now we just have the fact that until there is some brain
development you're dealing with just a mass of cells, not a human
being, so why shouldn't a woman have the right to have the little
parasite removed if she doesn't want it to eventually become a
human being?
****** Well to start with it's God's creation - appologies to atheists!
Really? So it's God she had sex with, not just some guy? So why
doesn't god keep his ***** in his pants and not create children inside of
women who aren't ready for the responsibilities?
In all seriousness though, it's the woman's body that is creating the
child, not God, even if God is the guy who got her pregnant. That would
just mean he provided half the blueprints for the child. It's still the
woman's body that creates the child.
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat
you with experience."
Good advice, but I'll argue with you anyway. I am doing this for
pure entertainment, not social status.
****** You are welcome, at least you are civil! Might even make a theist out
of you yet.::))
You paid little attention to the other posts of mine you've answered.
I am a theist. To be specific I am a deist.
--
The Left Reverend Plasmatron at hotpop com
"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think"
- Niels Bohr
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
15 Feb 2004 07:00:10 PM |
|
|
In talk.abortion, Warnock
<warnnock@pop.co.za>
wrote
on Sun, 15 Feb 2004 19:16:24 +0200
<c0ojpm$4i0$27@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9486AFBBE18A4keegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.17...
of course you do. intersting that you bother to deny it.
Submit evidence.
sure. your position forces women to remain pregnant against their will.
****** Nothing wrong with that, they used up their FREE CHOICE, when they
slept with a man!
The opening of her legs to impale herself isn't the only choice-point
in the timeline, you know. And who decides whether it's the only
moral one? Many women appear to enjoy sex (it would stand to reason,
since many women seem to like to seduce us men :-) ).
But yes, she did make her choice at that point -- to have sex,
hopefully wildly ecstatic/orgasmic/orgiastically moaning and
screaming "more more MORE!!!" sex as they both writhe around each
other like snakes in a mating-ball, as opposed to "oh, that was
it?" sex, but sex all the same.
[rest snipped]
--
#191, -- insert random rebel yell here
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "W.Syme" |
|
| Title: Re: Vacuous Pro-Liar Arguments |
15 Feb 2004 09:36:58 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 19:16:24 +0200, "Warnock" <warnnock@pop.co.za>
wrote:
****** Nothing wrong with that, they used up their FREE CHOICE, when they
slept with a man!
What kind of ***** is that.
When you have a heart attack, I hope the hospital refuses you on the
grounds that you've used up your free choice of excercising more.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
