How do you feel about...

[eclipse]

Let's try and dumb this discussion down (even further). Why is it that our freedom to kill each other are abridged, but our freedom to live is not (generally)?

Extra points if you can realize why restriction of freedom of murdering each other has nothing to do with abortion.

Probably because you'd really hate it if I tried to kill you, and most people can agree on that.

By that logic, the majority should rule (which it attempts to do in a democracy). Please tell me how that's turning out.

Yeah, that's why you're silly and childish. Come on, man.

Taking your lumps is childish? It wasn't last time I checked.

A natural consequence of being shot is exsanguination, that doesn't mean if you get hit by a stray bullet you can't call the fucking ambulance.

"If you don't want to die, then don't go outside! It's not my fault if you get hit by a car, and I certainly don't support you going to the hospital if you do!"

I'm sure you went out of your way to be shot, or hit by a car. Neither of those are in your control. Getting pregnant is. See the difference?

Which women? All women? Most women? Some women?

I mean, let's apply your logic here; even if we believe you totally at your word, that all women believe carrying a pregnancy is nowhere near as bad as the threat of death. I expect that in such a case, you would probably agree that most women believe they'd rather be a slave than dead. Is it cool, then, for women to lose their rights?

Like, where is your argument even coming from?

If you equate getting pregnant to enslavement, you need a reality check. That logic would only hold if the woman voluntarily gave up her rights.

You support a woman killing her goddamn self over being forced to carry a pregnancy to term but you won't even support a teenager's unwanted pregnancy being aborted?

What the fuck is wrong with you?

Have you forgotten that getting pregnant requires some outside action? One that is usually voluntary?

Perhaps the point is lost on you, but if you're voluntarily having sex, and you get pregnant, you should bear the child. If you don't like it, don't have sex. I don't care how cruel or demented this seems to you, but you asking what the fuck is wrong with me isn't going to change that. If anything, I'm more likely to perceive you as someone unwilling to take the consequences for his actions, and that, in my opinion, is a far worse stigma than any unwanted pregnancy.

[Esau of Isaac]

Probably because you'd really hate it if I tried to kill you, and most people can agree on that.

By that logic, the majority should rule (which it attempts to do in a democracy). Please tell me how that's turning out.

...Are you being serious with me right now? Are you really this thick.

Taking your lumps is childish? It wasn't last time I checked.

Refusing treatment based on illogical morality is childish.

I'm sure you went out of your way to be shot, or hit by a car. Neither of those are in your control. Getting pregnant is. See the difference?

No, because even in such a case you wouldn't leave a person to bleed out on the fucking road. At least, a human being with a goddamn heart wouldn't. I can't say I'd be very surprised at this point if you began arguing you would let them die.

And the point is that something occurring that one doesn't desire shouldn't cause them to have to face the consequences of pain and anguish when they could easily reverse them with treatment that would harm no one.

If you equate getting pregnant to enslavement, you need a reality check. That logic would only hold if the woman voluntarily gave up her rights.

It is infuriating for you to so easily miss the point. What I am trying to say is that your argument that someone women find carrying a pregnancy to be more preferable than death doesn't mean that women should have to carry pregnancies they do not want.

Have you forgotten that getting pregnant requires some outside action? One that is usually voluntary?

No, I haven't. It's irrelevant.

Perhaps the point is lost on you, but if you're voluntarily having sex, and you get pregnant, you should bear the child.

YES YOU MORON, THIS IS WHERE YOU EXPLAIN YOUR POINT.

If you don't like it, don't have sex. I don't care how cruel or demented this seems to you, but you asking what the fuck is wrong with me isn't going to change that. If anything, I'm more likely to perceive you as someone unwilling to take the consequences for his actions, and that, in my opinion, is a far worse stigma than any unwanted pregnancy.

You're merely repeating your ideals continuously, without backing them up with logic. And I care less how you view me. I perceive you as an amoral jackass fine with holding a woman prisoner in her own body.

Edited August 16, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[eclipse]

Might I ask what your point is? All you seem to do is berate me for my ideals. Do ideals need logic? I think not.

And I care less how you view me. I perceive you as an amoral jackass fine with holding a woman prisoner in her own body.

Thank you, but flattery will not improve my opinion of you.

[Esau of Isaac]

Might I ask what your point is? All you seem to do is berate me for my ideals. Do ideals need logic? I think not.

No, they don't. But it doesn't hurt them, and not having some form of a logical basis when it comes to ideals is generally a bad idea. Which is why your ideals suck ass.

If your ideals are illogical, then I'm going to mock them. Is there a reason I shouldn't?

Thank you, but flattery will not improve my opinion of you.

That's what they all say in the beginning.

Edited August 16, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[volkethereaper]

To answer your question Esau:

If your ideals are illogical, then I'm going to mock them. Is there a reason I shouldn't?

Yes, there is. What right do you have to mock something "illogical" when the very basis on which you judge it is inherently illogical? By virtue of your humanity you are an inherently flawed thing. This means that all of your logic is inherently flawed, also. Even if, by some improbable chance, your reasoning matches with with some overarching logic and your morals equate with those of some great objective morality, you cannot possibly know. Further, because other people share your views doesn't make them any more or less valid. All human beings share your utter imperfection. In such a cosmos how can you be justified in mocking someone else's ideals? Your every post reeks of a superiority which you simply do not posess. You are no better than anyone else, your morals are no more justifiable than their's, and you have no right to mock another persons ideals, however illogical they may appear to you. So, for the good of your precious logic, shut up and quite taking yourself so seriously.

[Esau of Isaac]

Yes, there is. What right do you have to mock something "illogical" when the very basis on which you judge it is inherently illogical?

The basis on which I judge it is inherently illogical? Bwuh?

By virtue of your humanity you are an inherently flawed thing.

I'm with you so far.

This means that all of your logic is inherently flawed, also.

Bwuh?

Even if, by some improbable chance, your reasoning matches with with some overarching logic and your morals equate with those of some great objective morality, you cannot possibly know.

Morality is subjective. Your morality is subjective. My morality is subjective. However, my morality is tempered with objective facts and solid reasoning. An anvil is actually present in the process.

Further, because other people share your views doesn't make them any more or less valid. All human beings share your utter imperfection. In such a cosmos how can you be justified in mocking someone else's ideals?

By endlessly mocking your ideals and by extension yourself. I thought this was evident.

Your every post reeks of a superiority which you simply do not posess.

My beliefs are superior to yours. Trust me.

You are no better than anyone else, your morals are no more justifiable than their's, and you have no right to mock another persons ideals, however illogical they may appear to you.

I have every right to mock your ideals. They put forth an utterly harmful ideology based around illogic and pure stupidity. That you attempt to shadow this fact by claiming I have no objective ground to stand on by which to judge your painfully moronic views is utterly laughable.

How can you even state that my views are not better than yours? Isn't it kind of ironic that you (vainly) attempt to utilize logic to state that logic is inherently untenable?

So, for the good of your precious logic, shut up and quite taking yourself so seriously.

I literally guffawed.

Edited August 17, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[volkethereaper]

And what makes your ideas better than mine? Explain that to me please, oh intelligent one. I, a lowly moron, seek your great wisdom. Tell me how your thoughts and ideals, inherintly subjective as they are, are so much greater than mine? Or, perhaps you're like my father, unable to see the worth of others? By the way, when it came to explaining things logically I was trying to show you respect by playing on your field by your terms. It seems, though, that I misjudged you.

Edited August 17, 2010 by volkethereaper

[eclipse]

No, they don't. But it doesn't hurt them, and not having some form of a logical basis when it comes to ideals is generally a bad idea. Which is why your ideals suck ass.

I'm not going to answer this. This topic has gone far enough in the wrong direction.

If your ideals are illogical, then I'm going to mock them. Is there a reason I shouldn't?

That depends on whether or not you honestly care about others (not just some random teenager who was careless). When two ideologies clash, the best possible outcome is some thread on a forum. The worst? Watching history repeat itself over and over again. The current iteration crashed into a certain structure almost nine years ago, and look at what it sparked.

Why can't we agree to disagree, and try to live in harmony?

[Esau of Isaac]

And what makes your ideas better than mine? Explain that to me please, oh intelligent one. I, a lowly moron, seek your great wisdom. Tell me how your thoughts and ideals, inherintly subjective as they are, are so much greater than mine? Or, perhaps you're like my father, unable to see the worth of others? By the way, when it came to explaining things logically I was trying to show you respect by playing on your field by your terms. It seems, though, that I misjudged you.

I actually thought you were eclipse. Both of you need avatars. Liked the projection, though.

Still, of course my stance is better than yours. In your opinion, logic is useless, so you can't even determine that my opinions are on the same level as mine. At least in my personal opinion I can weigh different viewpoints. That's of course just speaking of pure effectiveness. I actually have no idea what your views are in the first place.

That depends on whether or not you honestly care about others (not just some random teenager who was careless).

Okay

When two ideologies clash, the best possible outcome is some thread on a forum. The worst? Watching history repeat itself over and over again. The current iteration crashed into a certain structure almost nine years ago, and look at what it sparked.

Wait, what?

Why can't we agree to disagree, and try to live in harmony?

Because I think your views are harmful. It's hard to live in harmony with a person who preaches disharmony.

Edited August 17, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[Anouleth]

I want to see what you think about certain things and why. I am a bit bored and just want to see what people think of these.

1)Underage sex.

2)Underage drinking.

3)Smoking pot.

Depends on your definition of 'underage'. I think as long as you're 16, you should be allowed to do all three. Possibly at the same time.

[volkethereaper]

Still, of course my stance is better than yours. In your opinion, logic is useless, so you can't even determine that my opinions are on the same level as mine. At least in my personal opinion I can weigh different viewpoints. That's of course just speaking of pure effectiveness. I actually have no idea what your views are in the first place.

On the contrary, I don't believe logic is useless. It is practical, and no matter how flawed something may be, practicality will over rule that. I simply think that it's wrong to mock another person because you percieve them as illogical. Logic is fine to use, good to use, actually, but mocking someone based on your logic compared to their's is not justifiable. My opinions on abortion, by the way, are that it is morally repugnant in many cases. Nevertheless, taking that course of action is that person's perrogative and I have no right to impede them, and I similarly have no right to judge them based on that action. In other words: It's wrong, but I won't stop you or treat you badly because you do it.

EDIT: Added an Avatar, just for you, Esau. ;)

Edited August 17, 2010 by volkethereaper

[eclipse]

Who needs an avatar? :P

Wait, what?

Here's some history lessons from various points in history (most of it recent), courtesy of Wikipedia.

Lesson one (religious ideology clash)

Lesson two (if you're gonna be racist, keep it to yourself)

Lesson three (even more embarrassing to Christianity than the Dark Ages)

Lesson four (and look at what it started)

Lesson five (I'd sooner support Sarah Palin than this)

The difference you don't seem to understand is that my ideals stay in my head.

Because I think your views are harmful. It's hard to live in harmony with a person who preaches disharmony.

See above. Again.

[volkethereaper]

And before Eclipse is criticized for stating her views: To be fair, this is a public forum where little harm can be done by expressing one's views.

EDIT: meant "one's" not "bone's"

Edited August 17, 2010 by volkethereaper

[Crystal Shards]

On the contrary, I don't believe logic is useless. It is practical, and no matter how flawed something may be, practicality will over rule that. I simply think that it's wrong to mock another person because you percieve them as illogical. Logic is fine to use, good to use, actually, but mocking someone based on your logic compared to their's is not justifiable. My opinions on abortion, by the way, are that it is morally repugnant in many cases. Nevertheless, taking that course of action is that person's perrogative and I have no right to impede them, and I similarly have no right to judge them based on that action. In other words: It's wrong, but I won't stop you or treat you badly because you do it.

EDIT: Added an Avatar, just for you, Esau. ;)

Mocking can be practical, though. By showing a stupid idea in a joking light, you often show the person exactly how stupid his or her idea is. Being completely serious doesn't help sometimes, and Esau started out serious and eclipse still didn't/doesn't get why her idea is dumb. I mean honestly, banning abortion based on intelligence/lack of foresight is... unintelligent. There's really no serious way to take an idea like that. If you took everything completely seriously your head would likely implode (trust me, I've heard it all when it comes to abortion, God, and homosexuality).

Edited August 17, 2010 by Crystal Shards

[volkethereaper]

Mocking can be practical, though. By showing a stupid idea in a joking light, you often show the person exactly how stupid his or her idea is.

Although this is sometimes true, what was once a friendly, if spirited, debate can easily become a fight where nothing gets discussed and people are hurt emotionally. Far better to just say why you disagree in a firm, but respectful manner. If the point is to get someone to think intelligently, then mocking them and their ideas is rarely the right way to go.

And honestly, banning abortion based on intelligence is... unintelligent. There's really no serious way to take an idea like that.

Huh? I don't believe in banning abortion. Or is this about what Eclipse said?

[Crystal Shards]

Although this is sometimes true, what was once a friendly, if spirited, debate can easily become a fight where nothing gets discussed and people are hurt emotionally. Far better to just say why you disagree in a firm, but respectful manner. If the point is to get someone to think intelligently, then mocking them and their ideas is rarely the right way to go.

You go your way, and Esau will go his. He doesn't need you telling or advising him what to do. He's intelligent and can make decisions for himself. And honestly, his method has changed more than a few minds, so I wouldn't act like it doesn't/rarely work(s). Sometimes you just have to point out that a stupid idea is stupid.

Huh? I don't believe in banning abortion. Or is this about what Eclipse said?

Er, yeah. Eclipse has stated several times that in her eyes, someone who isn't intelligent/thoughtful enough to use contraception should be forced to take the fetus to term.

[Esau of Isaac]

On the contrary, I don't believe logic is useless. It is practical, and no matter how flawed something may be, practicality will over rule that. I simply think that it's wrong to mock another person because you percieve them as illogical. Logic is fine to use, good to use, actually, but mocking someone based on your logic compared to their's is not justifiable. My opinions on abortion, by the way, are that it is morally repugnant in many cases. Nevertheless, taking that course of action is that person's perrogative and I have no right to impede them, and I similarly have no right to judge them based on that action. In other words: It's wrong, but I won't stop you or treat you badly because you do it.

Why not? I would rather you treat me badly for something you look down upon me for. If it's something that I find horrible, I'll point it out as reprehensible very clearly. I do so mockingly down the road, if the individual refuses to engage in an intelligent debate, but at the base I'm still just pointing out my distaste for their beliefs.

EDIT: Added an Avatar, just for you, Esau. ;)

Here's some history lessons from various points in history (most of it recent), courtesy of Wikipedia.

Lesson one (religious ideology clash)

Lesson two (if you're gonna be racist, keep it to yourself)

Lesson three (even more embarrassing to Christianity than the Dark Ages)

Lesson four (and look at what it started)

Lesson five (I'd sooner support Sarah Palin than this)

The difference you don't seem to understand is that my ideals stay in my head.

Okay, but if you had the option to apply them, you would. In your perfect world, peoples' freedoms are abridged for no reason. That irks me, even if you don't act on your views.

See above. Again.

Imagine living with a guy who hates black people; he preaches how low the black race is, and that if he had it his way, he would kill every single one of them. He also states that he'll never act on these beliefs.

Is it not still uncomfortable to be around this person, based around his attitude?

[eclipse]

Why not? I would rather you treat me badly for something you look down upon me for.

All you'll do is antagonize me. Please try to look at this from a point of view that isn't yours.

If your goal is to antagonize me, then keep it up.

Okay, but if you had the option to apply them, you would. In your perfect world, peoples' freedoms are abridged for no reason. That irks me, even if you don't act on your views.

If I had the option of applying it with perfect judgment. It look like you also missed something else I said about humans being lousy judges, so having the option for all is far more realistic than the option for none.

I know when my ideals should be separated from reality. Do you?

Imagine living with a guy who hates black people; he preaches how low the black race is, and that if he had it his way, he would kill every single one of them. He also states that he'll never act on these beliefs.

Is it not still uncomfortable to be around this person, based around his attitude?

For my area, this is normal (but unspoken). Thus, I'd be right at home. I'm sure it's far more true around the world than most are willing to admit (including you).

You go your way, and Esau will go his. He doesn't need you telling or advising him what to do. He's intelligent and can make decisions for himself. And honestly, his method has changed more than a few minds, so I wouldn't act like it doesn't/rarely work(s). Sometimes you just have to point out that a stupid idea is stupid.

This doesn't work on me. Many others before have tried, and all it did was leave ill will all around.

Er, yeah. Eclipse has stated several times that in her eyes, someone who isn't intelligent/thoughtful enough to use contraception should be forced to take the fetus to term.

That's my opinion, and I'm not changing it on anyone's account. Take it or leave it.

[Esau of Isaac]

All you'll do is antagonize me. Please try to look at this from a point of view that isn't yours.

I'll antagonize you either way. Better for you to be honest about it than attempt to maintain appearances of neutrality for no reason.

If your goal is to antagonize me, then keep it up.

Roger.

If I had the option of applying it with perfect judgment. It look like you also missed something else I said about humans being lousy judges, so having the option for all is far more realistic than the option for none.

How does it work with perfect judgment, when the idea of a person being undeserving is subjective itself? I mean, it doesn't matter how perfect the judging is, since the measuring stick it's using doesn't have any quantifiable values to decide when someone can and can't get an abortion.

I know when my ideals should be separated from reality. Do you?

Why would my ideals be separated from something I strive for? Isn't that sort of, you know, the point of ideals?

For my area, this is normal (but unspoken). Thus, I'd be right at home. I'm sure it's far more true around the world than most are willing to admit (including you).

I don't think it's true of any first-world nation's major populations. There are racists present in all places, but not very many as vocal as I'm trying to emphasize here.

Nevermind that I'm just asking whether you would be uncomfortable with this person around, constantly preaching a message of hate and illogic, and not whether or not his kind are prevalent.

This doesn't work on me. Many others before have tried, and all it did was leave ill will all around.

They all say that.

That's my opinion, and I'm not changing it on anyone's account. Take it or leave it.

What if your God told you it was a wrong point of view?

Edited August 18, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[eclipse]

How does it work with perfect judgment, when the idea of a person being undeserving is subjective itself? I mean, it doesn't matter how perfect the judging is, since the measuring stick it's using doesn't have any quantifiable values to decide when someone can and can't get an abortion.

Good, glad you got that in your head. Keep it there.

Why would my ideals be separated from something I strive for? Isn't that sort of, you know, the point of ideals?

Ideals are something that would be true if things were perfect. This world will never be perfect, so I don't see my ideals being achieved.

Don't know if that's the same with you.

I don't think it's true of any first-world nation's major populations. There are racists present in all places, but not very many as vocal as I'm trying to emphasize here.

Nevermind that I'm just asking whether you would be uncomfortable with this person around, constantly preaching a message of hate and illogic, and not whether or not his kind are prevalent.

Travel to a place where you're a very distinct minority, and stay there for a while. Please report how your experience is.

I work in a place where logical meets illogical, constantly. After hearing something involving Pokemon and the devil, I've learned not to take the opinions of others personally (or seriously).

What if your God told you it was a wrong point of view?

That will be the day you find a way to change someone's mind without resorting to personal attacks.

See the above series of points? I don't mind answering this. However. . .

I'll antagonize you either way. Better for you to be honest about it than attempt to maintain appearances of neutrality for no reason.

You seem to have no problems hurting others for your own personal gain. Where I'm from, that's called being malicious. I do not like malicious people, and I tend to view their opinions as something I'd rather not follow. Whether you continue down that path is up to you.

Before I hear anything about how my opinions about abortion are the same, keep in mind that you're being malicious to the person behind this account, while the extent of my "malice" goes to a theoretical construct (which I know will never be reality).

[Phoenix Wright]

Eclipse, I don't think Esau is doing this for himself. He's arguing with you to help you see that you opinion on abortion is malicious.

[volkethereaper]

Why not? I would rather you treat me badly for something you look down upon me for. If it's something that I find horrible, I'll point it out as reprehensible very clearly. I do so mockingly down the road, if the individual refuses to engage in an intelligent debate, but at the base I'm still just pointing out my distaste for their beliefs.

I have only respect for your beliefs, my friend, just as I do everyone else's (or at least I try, anyway). Combine this with the fact that I can't really know if I'm in the right, and I become the kind of person who tries not to offend people. My advice to you is an attempt at being friendly, and I certainly hope you take it as such.

You never cease to make me chuckle.

You go your way, and Esau will go his. He doesn't need you telling or advising him what to do. He's intelligent and can make decisions for himself. And honestly, his method has changed more than a few minds, so I wouldn't act like it doesn't/rarely work(s). Sometimes you just have to point out that a stupid idea is stupid.

As stated above my advice is only an attempt at being friendly, nothing more. I've seen healthy relationships disintegrate because people use that method of arguing. Granted, on the internet the stakes tend to be much lower, but I didn't think it would hurt to try and communicate to him some of the "knowledge" I've accumulated. I'm rather fond of his humor, and it would be sad to see something negative happen to him, or to someone else on his account.

At Phoenix: Ultimately, we're all out here for our own gratification. Debating on the internet is a prime example. Certainly I think Esau means well, but he also enjoys fulfilling his objectives in a very infuriating manner. And against someone like Eclipse, his efforts will, most likely, be ultimately fruitless.

[eclipse]

Eclipse, I don't think Esau is doing this for himself. He's arguing with you to help you see that you opinion on abortion is malicious.

I've pointed out that arguing isn't the way to change my mind.

[RUSH]

Legalization of Marijuana is getting nearer and nearer. People are finally seeing that POT DOES NOT HARM YOU. I am not a pot smoker. My brother, however is. My brother is a waaaaaaay nicer guy when he's high. It does not impair your judgment. A common misconception is that smoking pot impairs judgment and is dangerous for people on the roadways. My brother is a WAY better driver high. My brother is nicer high, he drives better when he's high, he focuses better when he's high... Pot does not kill brain cells. There's actually research to show that marijuana can actually stimulate brain and other organ growth and health. And it's not even addictive. The question is WHY doesn't everyone do it? Well the main reason is because the media has forced it into our brains that marijuana is bad. We have been told by the news, the government, our schools, television in general, that marijuana is bad. But it's not. But now you're probably reading this saying "wait. didnt this guy say he wasn't a pot smoker?" Yes. I did say that. Now why don't I do it? I hate the smell. I hate the taste. I can't stand it. It's not for me. It's not for everyone. But that doesn't mean it should be illegal. California is getting closer and closer to having it legalized. Once they get it legalized, there's nothing stopping other states from doing it. Soon enough, you'll be able to buy weed just as easily as you'd be able to buy cigarettes, alcohol, or porn. It'll have an age restraint, of course. But it'll probably be even more common cigarettes soon enough.

Umm I'm just kindof going to jump in here and reply to this at the same time.

I kindof have a problem with underage sex. People in relationships aren't really prepared for offspring. Enough said I hope.

The other two I mostly approve of, but they can totally go south... I know from experience with drinking and I've seen enough lazy potheads to know the other one.

Anyway, I smoke a decent amount and dude, there is no way he's a better driver when he's high. I'm sure he's nicer, but unless his driving is severely inhibited by constant road-rage, there's no way. Your reaction times go way down, thats the main way to spot high people; if they're decently high they respond slowly, meet eyes slowly, talk slowly. You may be better at video games, but that may just be a perception.

I agree that people get nicer, but theres no way someone gets better at driving (unless they usually drive at 120 like a raging asshole).

Marijuana is addictive. Its not very addictive and its also not physically addictive (its psychologically addictive, like video games, but stronger).

I hope it becomes legal and I sure hope it doesn't damage the human brain, but there are plenty of scientists out there who believe that it does.

[Esau of Isaac]

Ideals are something that would be true if things were perfect. This world will never be perfect, so I don't see my ideals being achieved.

Don't know if that's the same with you.

Ideals are goals, man. And what things would need to be perfect for your ideals to be reached? Because the ideal you're trying to push centers around imperfection.

Travel to a place where you're a very distinct minority, and stay there for a while. Please report how your experience is.

I've never left America, and have only traveled to areas wherein the chief demographic are whites. It's kind of hard to have otherwise.

I work in a place where logical meets illogical, constantly. After hearing something involving Pokemon and the devil, I've learned not to take the opinions of others personally (or seriously).

Everyone lives in a place where logical meets illogical. Hearing about fundamentalist arguments over Pokemon and the Devil is a bit different from someone stating they would like to wipe the world clean of a race.

That will be the day you find a way to change someone's mind without resorting to personal attacks.

This is what's awesome. I can use all of the reasoning and logical explaining I want without you budging an inch, but it would only require your God to say a single sentence and you'd change your whole worldview.

I guess it just goes to show the reason why religion has persisted for so long.

You seem to have no problems hurting others for your own personal gain. Where I'm from, that's called being malicious. I do not like malicious people, and I tend to view their opinions as something I'd rather not follow. Whether you continue down that path is up to you.

Before I hear anything about how my opinions about abortion are the same, keep in mind that you're being malicious to the person behind this account, while the extent of my "malice" goes to a theoretical construct (which I know will never be reality).

It doesn't change that you have a malicious worldview. Again, in a racist's perfect worldview, there's no [insert race here]. Just because that will probably never happen doesn't mean that he's not a horrible person. Similarly, you've got no ground with your accusations of malice. You're just as bad as me, and in fact far worse, you just wrap it up in flowery speech.

Sure, I may mock you, but I still view you as a person fundamentally similar to everyone else, and thus deserving of the same rights and legal capabilities of everyone else. It's depressing that you don't think the same of others as well, and piddle over an unimportant detail, especially when it's based upon a line of reasoning that doesn't hold up well under even light scrutiny.

At Phoenix: Ultimately, we're all out here for our own gratification. Debating on the internet is a prime example. Certainly I think Esau means well, but he also enjoys fulfilling his objectives in a very infuriating manner. And against someone like Eclipse, his efforts will, most likely, be ultimately fruitless.

Doubters only serve to make my eventual victory that much sweeter.

I've pointed out that arguing isn't the way to change my mind.

Well in the past five minutes I've been trying to phone your God to get him in the discussion, but he's not picking up. So I guess we're left with just going back to debating.

Edited August 18, 2010 by Esau of Isaac