No Prayer in Public Schools !

[Dragon]

I also claimed you relied heavily on the "Because I said so!" tactic.

You helped me prove that.

LOL I did no such thing. Do try to pay attention to what I'm actually saying, all right?

Meanwhile, your claim that conservatism is vague and amorphous is a strawman. While no one conservative believes in every tenet, there is indeed a defined structure to conservatism.

Do you understand what a "straw man" is? You certainly didn't describe one above. A straw man is the presentation of something other than your opponent's argument, which you can then argue against and claim to have rebutted your opponent. For example, my post to which you originally responded presented an example of a school district allowing the Gideons to distribute Bibles, but reconsidering the policy as soon as non-Christian religious material was offered in the same way. The point I was making (which I clearly stated) was that when the Christian right wants endorsement of Christianity in public schools, they are not defending religious liberty, but encroaching on the religious liberty of others. That's what I was saying, that, and nothing else.

You replied by implying that I had said all "conservatives" behave in a similar manner as the school, and taking me to task for jumping to that conclusion. That's a straw man. Why? Because I did NOT jump to that conclusion. I was NOT saying that all conservatives are like that. I'm pretty sure I didn't even use the WORD "conservative" in that post. You were putting words in my mouth, and arguing against, not what I said, but what you (untruthfully) said I said.

Nor have I claimed that conservatism is "vague and amorphous," but even if I had, that would still not be a straw man, because it would not be putting words into someone else's mouth.

As I noted above, I don't think this kind of behavior is universal among "conservatives" in general, all potential flavors thereof. I do, however, think it is at least nearly universal among the religious right, which is a narrower category than "conservatives" in general.

 

[daveman]

I also claimed you relied heavily on the "Because I said so!" tactic.

You helped me prove that.

LOL I did no such thing. Do try to pay attention to what I'm actually saying, all right?

Meanwhile, your claim that conservatism is vague and amorphous is a strawman. While no one conservative believes in every tenet, there is indeed a defined structure to conservatism.

Do you understand what a "straw man" is? You certainly didn't describe one above. A straw man is the presentation of something other than your opponent's argument, which you can then argue against and claim to have rebutted your opponent. For example, my post to which you originally responded presented an example of a school district allowing the Gideons to distribute Bibles, but reconsidering the policy as soon as non-Christian religious material was offered in the same way. The point I was making (which I clearly stated) was that when the Christian right wants endorsement of Christianity in public schools, they are not defending religious liberty, but encroaching on the religious liberty of others. That's what I was saying, that, and nothing else.

You replied by implying that I had said all "conservatives" behave in a similar manner as the school, and taking me to task for jumping to that conclusion. That's a straw man. Why? Because I did NOT jump to that conclusion. I was NOT saying that all conservatives are like that. I'm pretty sure I didn't even use the WORD "conservative" in that post. You were putting words in my mouth, and arguing against, not what I said, but what you (untruthfully) said I said.

Nor have I claimed that conservatism is "vague and amorphous," but even if I had, that would still not be a straw man, because it would not be putting words into someone else's mouth.

As I noted above, I don't think this kind of behavior is universal among "conservatives" in general, all potential flavors thereof. I do, however, think it is at least nearly universal among the religious right, which is a narrower category than "conservatives" in general.

You really just can't help it, can you?

 

[JakeStarkey]

I also claimed you relied heavily on the "Because I said so!" tactic.

You helped me prove that.

LOL I did no such thing. Do try to pay attention to what I'm actually saying, all right?

Meanwhile, your claim that conservatism is vague and amorphous is a strawman. While no one conservative believes in every tenet, there is indeed a defined structure to conservatism.

Do you understand what a "straw man" is? You certainly didn't describe one above. A straw man is the presentation of something other than your opponent's argument, which you can then argue against and claim to have rebutted your opponent. For example, my post to which you originally responded presented an example of a school district allowing the Gideons to distribute Bibles, but reconsidering the policy as soon as non-Christian religious material was offered in the same way. The point I was making (which I clearly stated) was that when the Christian right wants endorsement of Christianity in public schools, they are not defending religious liberty, but encroaching on the religious liberty of others. That's what I was saying, that, and nothing else.

You replied by implying that I had said all "conservatives" behave in a similar manner as the school, and taking me to task for jumping to that conclusion. That's a straw man. Why? Because I did NOT jump to that conclusion. I was NOT saying that all conservatives are like that. I'm pretty sure I didn't even use the WORD "conservative" in that post. You were putting words in my mouth, and arguing against, not what I said, but what you (untruthfully) said I said.

Nor have I claimed that conservatism is "vague and amorphous," but even if I had, that would still not be a straw man, because it would not be putting words into someone else's mouth.

As I noted above, I don't think this kind of behavior is universal among "conservatives" in general, all potential flavors thereof. I do, however, think it is at least nearly universal among the religious right, which is a narrower category than "conservatives" in general.

You really just can't help it, can you?

Deflection-Daveman can't help himself.

 

[daveman]

LOL I did no such thing. Do try to pay attention to what I'm actually saying, all right?



Do you understand what a "straw man" is? You certainly didn't describe one above. A straw man is the presentation of something other than your opponent's argument, which you can then argue against and claim to have rebutted your opponent. For example, my post to which you originally responded presented an example of a school district allowing the Gideons to distribute Bibles, but reconsidering the policy as soon as non-Christian religious material was offered in the same way. The point I was making (which I clearly stated) was that when the Christian right wants endorsement of Christianity in public schools, they are not defending religious liberty, but encroaching on the religious liberty of others. That's what I was saying, that, and nothing else.

You replied by implying that I had said all "conservatives" behave in a similar manner as the school, and taking me to task for jumping to that conclusion. That's a straw man. Why? Because I did NOT jump to that conclusion. I was NOT saying that all conservatives are like that. I'm pretty sure I didn't even use the WORD "conservative" in that post. You were putting words in my mouth, and arguing against, not what I said, but what you (untruthfully) said I said.

Nor have I claimed that conservatism is "vague and amorphous," but even if I had, that would still not be a straw man, because it would not be putting words into someone else's mouth.

As I noted above, I don't think this kind of behavior is universal among "conservatives" in general, all potential flavors thereof. I do, however, think it is at least nearly universal among the religious right, which is a narrower category than "conservatives" in general.

You really just can't help it, can you?

Deflection-Daveman can't help himself.

You can't help rusing to the defense of a devout leftist.

Hint: Moderate Republicans aren't very likely to agree with leftists. You gonna drop your useless charade now?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You really just can't help it, can you?

Deflection-Daveman can't help himself.

You can't help rusing to the defense of a devout leftist.

Hint: Moderate Republicans aren't very likely to agree with leftists. You gonna drop your useless charade now?

daveman continues his useless charade. He is learning new words! And on another thread he is demonstrating his progressive left-wing views on education.