albpilot
Ace of Aces
Red Baron Fight XVIII Champ
I'm not frightened of terrorism, so please don't go and create a police state on my account...
Posts: 1,181
|
Post by albpilot on Mar 17, 2010 20:25:48 GMT -5
It would be erroneous for me to make a statement that Stephen you are a space alien. No matter how much "Proof" I offered, you are not a space alien. For me to provide what I think are 11 things that prove you to be a space alien and then demand you to provide proof that you are not is ludicrous, and a very poor way to debate an issue. You're trying to win an argument at the expense of whatever it costs. (what you accuse others of doing in one of your threads). I dunno, he might be able to pass for one... |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Mar 18, 2010 16:43:23 GMT -5
Your whole argument is flimsy and based solely on your political opinions about the events of history. Then it should be very easy to answer. My claims were documented and based in fact, even to the point of naming the specific legislation in question. That does not make me correct. However, my claims were not "wild." Not unless you had valid reasoning to believe so. If your views were based in actual Nazi positions and historically verifiable, then I could either accept that some folks will draw this conclusion with fair reasoning to do so, or I could refute the assertion with solid facts. I'm okay with that. |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Mar 18, 2010 16:44:30 GMT -5
Are you suggesting that we reach a conclusion first, and then make the evidence conform to it? If the conclusion is erroneous yes. That explains a lot. |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Mar 18, 2010 16:46:37 GMT -5
It would be erroneous for me to make a statement that Stephen you are a space alien. Quite possibly so. However, if I were green, had antennas on my helmet and rode around in space ships, you would be somewhat justified in drawing that conclusion even if I were not, in fact, a space alien. You might be incorrect, but your claim would not be "wild," and it would be sufficiently rational to deserve a refutation. |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Mar 18, 2010 16:47:10 GMT -5
It would be erroneous for me to make a statement that Stephen you are a space alien. No matter how much "Proof" I offered, you are not a space alien. For me to provide what I think are 11 things that prove you to be a space alien and then demand you to provide proof that you are not is ludicrous, and a very poor way to debate an issue. You're trying to win an argument at the expense of whatever it costs. (what you accuse others of doing in one of your threads). I dunno, he might be able to pass for one... Been accused of it before! |
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Mar 19, 2010 13:16:19 GMT -5
It would be erroneous for me to make a statement that Stephen you are a space alien. Quite possibly so. However, if I were green, had antennas on my helmet and rode around in space ships, you would be somewhat justified in drawing that conclusion even if I were not, in fact, a space alien. You might be incorrect, but your claim would not be "wild," and it would be sufficiently rational to deserve a refutation. But you don't have antennae, you're not green, and we know that because we observe you. What behaviors of mine over the years have shown you that I would not fight for my freedom from oppression? It's the same thing. Both positions are ludicrous. |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Mar 20, 2010 19:18:42 GMT -5
What behaviors of mine over the years have shown you that I would not fight for my freedom from oppression? I did not say that you would not fight "for freedom from oppression." I said that your belief system, as I understand it, would have resulted in your being rejected by the founding fathers, but it is a near perfect match with those of the Tories. Now, to your question. "What behaviors of [yours] over the years have shown" me that you would not have supported the Revolution? A fair question. The answers are: If you defend the government's ability to steal from it's own citizens today, you certainly would not have opposed the paltry 3% tax paid by American colonists.
If you believe government should regulate drugs and alcohol today, you certainly would not have opposed the modest taxation and restrictions on rum and wine imposed by the Molasses Act and the Sugar Act of 1764.
If you support foreign wars against nations that have not attacked us today, you would not have opposed paying for King George's wars in Spain and France.
If you support a 2 million-man standing army today, you would certainly support a standing army of fewer than 20,000 troops for the British in 1776.
If you support police actions today, you would not rebel against British officers Hugh White and John Goldfinch when they opened fire on the criminals on King Street and started the Boston Massacre on March 5, 1770.
If you support federal controls to outlaw abortion over the autonomy of state legislatures, you could not have opposed the Townshend Acts of 1767 that transferred control of law from the colonies to the British central government.
If you do not support the abolition of today's regulations, papers and forms for immigration, banking and real estate, you certainly could not have opposed the Stamp Act of 1765 which mandated new forms for land purchases, wills and a multitude of other transactions.
If you do not oppose licensing drivers and forcing airline passengers to produce their state papers today, you certainly would not have any problem with the Coersive Act of 1775 which mandated permission for travel by American colonists in Boston (among other things).
If you support federal 501c3 IRS certification for churches today, you would certainly have accepted government designations and mandates in the Church of England in 1776.
If you support singing praises to the state and displaying symbolic national flags in churches today, you certainly would not have opposed doing the same for the British monarchy in your church in 1770.
And if government is established by God, your rebellion against the British crown would be sinful, unrighteous and blasphemous. Those are the behaviors that I perceive in you that would indicate that you would not have supported the founding fathers in 1776. I have answered your question completely and fairly, with historical background, and in sufficient detail to demonstrate a considered response. I ask for the same in return. |
|
