What makes arguing with liberals so frustrating #1

[Vast LWC]

Thank you for admitting you have no evidence that I have ever lied.

Because, you know, I don't lie.

Yeah, apparently you missed my previous post.

And apparently you missed the reality boat, it seems to have sailed without you, because I never made such an admission.

 

[Vast LWC]

PS..are you a part of a great left wing conspiracy? That is your name, isn't it?

That's commonly known as "sarcasm".

 

[koshergrl]

When my kids make up things, present them as truth, and then say "I was joking" I correct them and let them know..."No, you were lying."

You call it sarcasm. I call it lying.

So go ahead and find a (verifiable) lie. Not just a difference of opinion. That is not a lie.

 

[Vast LWC]

When my kids make up things, present them as truth, and then say "I was joking" I correct them and let them know..."No, you were lying."

You call it sarcasm. I call it lying.

So go ahead and find a (verifiable) lie. Not just a difference of opinion. That is not a lie.

When a lie is put there to be humorous and obvious, so that everyone knows it for what it is, that is called sarcasm.

Only a moron would mistake such an obvious joke for an attempt to deceive people.

Or Immanuel Kant I guess. That guy totally lacked a sense of humor.

 

[koshergrl]

Generally when people perpetuate a lie in something as basic as their internet handle, they aren't averse to lying down the line....

Anyway...are you going to find a lie I've told or what?

 

[gallantwarrior]

Ethics are moral principles as they apply to a particular group or profession. It applies specifically to the conduct of a particular group, as it applies to whatever it is they represent or belong to.

Morality is just right and wrong....regardless of a person's profession. For example, it's morally wrong for a mill worker to beat his children. But if a child welfare worker beats her children, she's not only morally wrong, she's behaving unethically.

I'm willing to go with those definitions. This is in a way a matter of semantics. But more specifically, what is "legal" is not necessarily moral or ethical.

Moral, and to a lesser extent ethical, covers a much wider range of behavior than legal does, mostly because the law follows morality, rather than the other way around. People make laws against behavior that they consider immoral, but they don't always feel that immorality necessarily requires legal correction.

Lying to your spouse, for example, is certainly immoral. It's not generally illegal, though.

So, even though it has been "legal" for Congressional members to trade on insider information, it is moral and ethical?

 

[Vast LWC]

Generally when people perpetuate a lie in something as basic as their internet handle, they aren't averse to lying down the line....

Anyway...are you going to find a lie I've told or what?

I already have, in my above posts.

Your lie was to generalize an entire group of people into some insane conspiracy to remove all individual rights, and demonize anyone that tried to stop them.

While you are in fact doing that exact same thing while you're saying it.


My "lie" is apparently to use a sarcastic possibly self-deprecating name for myself on a posting board.


And to top it off, you refuse to admit you were lying.

Wow.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ethics are moral principles as they apply to a particular group or profession. It applies specifically to the conduct of a particular group, as it applies to whatever it is they represent or belong to.

Morality is just right and wrong....regardless of a person's profession. For example, it's morally wrong for a mill worker to beat his children. But if a child welfare worker beats her children, she's not only morally wrong, she's behaving unethically.

I would have said more along the lines of a child welfare worker beating the foster children assigned to her as an example of unethical.

No, they are bound in all aspects of their lives...just as lawyers and doctors. They are mandatory reporters.

DHS workers get fired if they get a ticket for having their OWN children ride in their own cars without a seat belt or without proper restraints/boosters. and they will not get their job back or ever be able to ever work in the field again..it's child endangerment. If you have the slightest whiff of a "founded report" you're an unethical worker, and you're outtie.

Yup, but I still would have gone with something more directly work-related, if only because discussing morals and ethics so easily confuses so many people on the board.

 

[koshergrl]

And I pointed out that having a difference of opinion isn't a lie, and then pointed out your problem probably arises from a lack of understanding What Words Mean.

I wasn't lying. You are. Not only in your name, but in your pretense that you've proven that I lied about anything.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'm willing to go with those definitions. This is in a way a matter of semantics. But more specifically, what is "legal" is not necessarily moral or ethical.

Moral, and to a lesser extent ethical, covers a much wider range of behavior than legal does, mostly because the law follows morality, rather than the other way around. People make laws against behavior that they consider immoral, but they don't always feel that immorality necessarily requires legal correction.

Lying to your spouse, for example, is certainly immoral. It's not generally illegal, though.

So, even though it has been "legal" for Congressional members to trade on insider information, it is moral and ethical?

No, it's NOT moral and ethical, which is what I just said. Moral and ethical cover a much broader range than legal does, because legality follows morality, rather than the other way around. This is why there is now a movement to make Congressional insider trading illegal: because it's already considered immoral and unethical.

 

[koshergrl]

I would have said more along the lines of a child welfare worker beating the foster children assigned to her as an example of unethical.

No, they are bound in all aspects of their lives...just as lawyers and doctors. They are mandatory reporters.

DHS workers get fired if they get a ticket for having their OWN children ride in their own cars without a seat belt or without proper restraints/boosters. and they will not get their job back or ever be able to ever work in the field again..it's child endangerment. If you have the slightest whiff of a "founded report" you're an unethical worker, and you're outtie.

Yup, but I still would have gone with something more directly work-related, if only because discussing morals and ethics so easily confuses so many people on the board.

Except then they miss the piece about ethical behavior that they probably don't understand in the first place...which is that ethical behavior is behavior that adheres to a code of conduct that you are to follow whether you're working or not....

 

[Vast LWC]

And I pointed out that having a difference of opinion isn't a lie, and then pointed out your problem probably arises from a lack of understanding What Words Mean.

I wasn't lying. You are. Not only in your name, but in your pretense that you've proven that I lied about anything.

You keep telling yourself that Kosher.

You keep on thinking that saying horrible, nasty, untrue things about general groups of people isn't really a lie...

It's just a "difference of opinion"...

Hmm, perhaps that's why some people don't understand racism, or hatred of a religion or creed as a group.

Perhaps they just think that saying "all Hispanics are lazy" is a "difference of opinion".

Perhaps Hitler just thought killing all the Jewish folks in Europe was simply a "difference of opinion" on whether they should be alive or not.

Personally, I'll refrain from making blanket statements about people who disagree with me politically being evil.

There's a whole lot of people on the right that I personally like and respect. People that I would just as soon not vilify.

Unlike you. Who seems to delight in (how did you put it? Oh yes...) "Demonizing" her political adversaries.




And certainly keep on thinking that a bit of harmless, obvious sarcasm is not only on a level with, but a larger lie than the one you keep telling yourself.

 

[Vast LWC]

Why, just in the past week I have personally witnessed you call all of your political adversaries:

"Evil"
"Ruthless"
"Murderers of Children"
"Eugenicists"
"Demonizing Removers of Personal Liberties"

Hell, the list goes on and on, and every single time, you are including the entire group of all your political polar opposites, lumping them in to one giant conspiracy that you call "the Left" in a way that makes it sound like you're spitting when you say it.

 

[koshergrl]

All of those things are true.

Thank you for illustrating why it's frustrating to argue with liberals. We couldn't have done it without you.

 

[Vast LWC]

All of those things are true.

Thank you for illustrating why it's frustrating to argue with liberals. We couldn't have done it without you.

Yes, you're right, I did in fact illustrate perfectly why it's so difficult for YOU to argue with liberals.

It's because every time you sit down to talk with them, every other word out of your mouth is another derogatory term or phrase.

Why the hell would any of them want to talk to a vile, venom-spitting, nasty, harpy like yourself?

You want to know why it's so hard for you to talk to liberals? Here's how to find out:

Get a tape recorder.
Put it in front of your mouth.
Turn it on.
Speak for about an hour or two.
Play back what you said.

That should tell you all you need to know.

 

[koshergrl]

Yes, I find it difficult to argue with people who dont' know the meanings of the words they use, who change meanings as it suits them, and who lie blatantly about established facts...while completely ignoring the facts themselves.

And that is the point of the thread. As I said, you are thoughtful to present such an accurate picture of what makes you irritating.

 

[rightwinger]

All of those things are true.

Thank you for illustrating why it's frustrating to argue with liberals. We couldn't have done it without you.

Every time you post lies about liberals the baby Jesus cries

 

[gallantwarrior]

All of those things are true.

Thank you for illustrating why it's frustrating to argue with liberals. We couldn't have done it without you.

Every time you post lies about liberals the baby Jesus cries

What the **** would a liberal know about the baby Jesus and what he would cry about?

 

[Vast LWC]

Yes, I find it difficult to argue with people who dont' know the meanings of the words they use, who change meanings as it suits them, and who lie blatantly about established facts...while completely ignoring the facts themselves.

And that is the point of the thread. As I said, you are thoughtful to present such an accurate picture of what makes you irritating.

I see, having no response to the things that I posted, which are completely accurate, you fall back to repeating yourself over and over.

OK, I think I've proved my point here. On to other threads.

 

[rightwinger]

All of those things are true.

Thank you for illustrating why it's frustrating to argue with liberals. We couldn't have done it without you.

Every time you post lies about liberals the baby Jesus cries

What the **** would a liberal know about the baby Jesus and what he would cry about?

Hint......Jesus was a Liberal