Search results

No. Read some of the thread a little before bringing up your straw man.

When similar ends can be achieved without violence and mayhem, the violence and mayhem perpetrated is evil. Think Russia.

But, you bought them before the marriage so they would be considered your property. Your ex-wife intentionally or mistakenly claimed they were bought after the marriage and the judge mistakenly considered them community property. Scenario 2: What if you lent your neighbor the clubs and he says...

Because the application of simplistic notions leads to immoral results in a significant minority of situations. That's only because of circular reasoning. You define murder as bad killing and self-defense that results in death as good killing and not murder. This is a false dichotomy. Many...

Peer review is a check on validity check that should not be dismissed. Just because a peripheral fact cannot be used as absolute proof DOES not mean it is unworthy of discussion. When we know the limits on particular kinds of evidence, we can include them in the analysis giving them the...

Several officers were investigated for conduct unbecoming an officer that was deemed noncriminal in nature. At certain points officers wee outnumbered and tried de-escaltion techniques rather explicitly barring further infiltration. Of course this does not amount to an invitation. Binars...

If one capitol policeman invited a few early arrivals at the capitol building having had poor momentary judgment that does not become blanket permission for the rest of the crowd to push through barriers, ignore commands from the police, break windows and threaten hanging of public officials...

Seriously? Someones right to defend themself, loved ones, strangers, and property butts up against the requirement not to murder. The more complex understanding of morality includes consideration of reasonable force and rational retreat, for example. There is the situation where an evil doer...

I disagree. It is vague frequently. Relating a parable always involves interpretations that can differ. And, if a child can understand your basis for ethics then they are not complex enough. Ethics are fraught with dilemmas ( ie, overlaping priorities) that even those with high IQs must try...

This is my thread and you are off topic.

Which sort do you prefer?

I hope it was Top Ramen.

Interesting. Is the scripture precise enough? Does it have reasonable internal consistency? Does the reason for the vast array of differences between what Christians believe involve the answer to these questions? Looking at the Bible objectively is a banning offense in these parts, so I will...

Impeaching a source is not a fallacy and noting a consensus is not a fallacy -- unless it is the sole means of supporting a contention. Try not to commit the fallacy of being overly literal with fallacies.

So, suggesting a little skepticism in a supposed authority based on past behavior is a fallacy, but making a sweeping generalization about an entire group based a minor point of contention with one group member is sound logic? You are a trip.

You are being a noodge. You think you have upper hand by asking questions and not answering them. That is probably because you know that the case you hope to make is inherently weaker. Last try: Do Christians have a very solid general consensus about what is moral based on the Bible? How do...

You often commit the fallacy of the fallacy list. You accept someone else's list of fallacies without understanding many of the fallacies. The most prominent example is when you call out someone for saying I do not believe as a pleading based on incredulity. Trouble is the phrase has other...

You should win an award for the most substance free responses. You would do well to describe WHY following each response because it could move things forward.

Not after the third time on the same exact issue. You are playing games.

It appears he was involved in domestic violence and tax fraud. The latter is more relevant. He does not have a reputation for accuracy.