Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You're starting to make even less sense.That is because this is a loaded question. It has more than one single answer depending on every specific circumstance. Just a couple of those circumstances are, does the prostitute or the guy have an STD? Is the guy married and is he cheating on his wife?
There are so many other variables in the question that I can not even pretend to have all the right answers to it. Thus, it is a loaded question, but you already knew that.
That's not how I see it at all.
This is how I see it:
You made an absolute declarative statement, that there is no such thing as a victimless crime. As a general rule, I would agree with you. However there are exceptions. I simply provided you with one such exception to test how you would respond. Rather than being open-minded and objective, and acknowledging the obvious exception for what it is, you tap danced around it and essentially refused to attempt any semblance of intelletual honesty.
You fail.
Have a nice day.
Wow, I state that I can not answer your question with a simple one statement answer because it is complex, and you claim victory?
Have a nice run for political office someday...
You see, there is no single answer to the question, yet you want a single answer based on a broad circumstance. I didn't fail; you just don't see the fallacy in your own question.
Sometimes the prostitue can be the vctim. Sometimes the John can be the victim. Sometimes the victim can be a spouse, it depends on a set of variables you did not present. Thus, you submitted a faulty question. I am not "tap dancing", you just want me to pull an answer out of my ass when I am not even standing up.
You're starting to make even less sense.That's not how I see it at all.
This is how I see it:
You made an absolute declarative statement, that there is no such thing as a victimless crime. As a general rule, I would agree with you. However there are exceptions. I simply provided you with one such exception to test how you would respond. Rather than being open-minded and objective, and acknowledging the obvious exception for what it is, you tap danced around it and essentially refused to attempt any semblance of intelletual honesty.
You fail.
Have a nice day.
Wow, I state that I can not answer your question with a simple one statement answer because it is complex, and you claim victory?
Have a nice run for political office someday...
You see, there is no single answer to the question, yet you want a single answer based on a broad circumstance. I didn't fail; you just don't see the fallacy in your own question.
Sometimes the prostitue can be the vctim. Sometimes the John can be the victim. Sometimes the victim can be a spouse, it depends on a set of variables you did not present. Thus, you submitted a faulty question. I am not "tap dancing", you just want me to pull an answer out of my ass when I am not even standing up.
You made a categorical statement and now you seem to want to tailor circumstances to fit the statement.
Let's take a 70 year old guy who hires a prostitute, enjoys her services and pays her. Who is the victim here?
I am because I had to read these idiotic posts.
Excellent. Yet another poster without a sense of humor.I am because I had to read these idiotic posts.
Should I point out that you were the one dumb enough to read them? So, you are a victim of your own stupidity.
...that must be some killer stupidity...
Excellent. Yet another poster without a sense of humor.I am because I had to read these idiotic posts.
Should I point out that you were the one dumb enough to read them? So, you are a victim of your own stupidity.
...that must be some killer stupidity...
Or maybe you just think you are funny.Excellent. Yet another poster without a sense of humor.I am because I had to read these idiotic posts.
Should I point out that you were the one dumb enough to read them? So, you are a victim of your own stupidity.
...that must be some killer stupidity...
Excellent. Yet another poster without a sense of humor.I am because I had to read these idiotic posts.
Should I point out that you were the one dumb enough to read them? So, you are a victim of your own stupidity.
...that must be some killer stupidity...
So the only reason to return Polanski to prison is to prevent the next (unlikely) identical case?
A sense of humor means you can laugh at yourself and/or at life in general.
A few of you obviously cannot.
A sense of humor means you can laugh at yourself and/or at life in general.
A few of you obviously cannot.
Actually a more accurate definition would be:
"the trait of appreciating and being able to express the humorous"
Just because I didn't find you funny does not mean you can change definitions to justify your ineptitude...
Would you like a shovel?No thanks, I found an easier way to deal with the bullshit people spew on this board.A sense of humor means you can laugh at yourself and/or at life in general.
A few of you obviously cannot.
Actually a more accurate definition would be:
"the trait of appreciating and being able to express the humorous"
Just because I didn't find you funny does not mean you can change definitions to justify your ineptitude...
You're starting to make even less sense.Wow, I state that I can not answer your question with a simple one statement answer because it is complex, and you claim victory?
Have a nice run for political office someday...
You see, there is no single answer to the question, yet you want a single answer based on a broad circumstance. I didn't fail; you just don't see the fallacy in your own question.
Sometimes the prostitue can be the vctim. Sometimes the John can be the victim. Sometimes the victim can be a spouse, it depends on a set of variables you did not present. Thus, you submitted a faulty question. I am not "tap dancing", you just want me to pull an answer out of my ass when I am not even standing up.
You made a categorical statement and now you seem to want to tailor circumstances to fit the statement.
Let's take a 70 year old guy who hires a prostitute, enjoys her services and pays her. Who is the victim here?
Hey, all I said is that I do not believe in a victimless crime. I did not say that each and every circumstance it fits is simple, you made that leap on your own. I did not say that you had to believe the same as me. I did not say tat I have all the right answers to all your questions either.
By the way, simply telling me the man is 70 years old does not plug all the variables into place and I am not going to chase you around all day trying to get you to understand my chain of thought.
By the way, in this example, unless YOU are the 70 year old man we are talking about, you wouldn't be qualified to answer all the variables to my satisfaction. You see, everyone's life is different and all you can do is ask hypotheticals, which I am not about to argue with you.
A sense of humor means you can laugh at yourself and/or at life in general.
A few of you obviously cannot.
Actually a more accurate definition would be:
"the trait of appreciating and being able to express the humorous"
Just because I didn't find you funny does not mean you can change definitions to justify your ineptitude...
I don't care what the dictionary says. If you can't laugh at yourself, you absolutely do not have a complete sense of humor. Period.
