teapartysamurai
Gold Member
- Mar 27, 2010
- 20,056
- 2,562
- 290
- Thread starter
- #61
Do you notice that when liberals are losing a debate, they claim you have a position (you have never taken) and then expect you to debate from that false premise?
When you have quotes of me being for anything you have claimed let me know.
Here you go:
It is a double standard for liberals to be for banning freedoms on one hand, and then preach about the ground zero mosque from the same position of "freedom."
You believe liberals are for banning freedoms. Since you apparently think it's hypocritical for a liberal to be in support of any freedom (e.g. freedom of religious expression), that implies you believe liberalism is predicated on opposing and banning all freedoms and, in fact, all things.
I'm not sure how you can say you didn't claim that when that's the premise of your thread ('OMG, liberals are hypocrites for supporting a single instance of freedom of expression!').
Well wait a minute!!!!
Don't liberals for marijuana use, preface that argument on "freedom???"
"I should be able to put in my body anything I want!!!!!!"
Don't those for abortion PREFACE THAT ARGUMENT ON FREEDOM??????????
"It's my body, blah blah blah."
Aren't they arguing for the ground zero mosque on "freedom???????"
BUT!!!!!!!!! Transfat and cigarettes are NOT about freedom???????
I'm not prefacing this thread about what *I* think about freedom, it's what LIBERALS THINK is about freedom.
They do argue for legalizing drugs, and killing the unborn, and on and on and on, on the grounds of FREEDOM.
But suddenly it's not about freedom with cigarettes and transfat?
Why can't we argue for transfat and cigarettes the way liberals argue for handing out condoms in schools?
"They are going to do it anyway!"
I just find it interesting how the argument for "freedom" changes depending on the subject.