|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 7, 2022 1:02:57 GMT
The goalposts are no longer in the same county. Let me know if you want to get back to the discussion we were having.
Again, I do not agree with your assessment, but if this is how you wish to end our conversation, I am fine with it. Freon
I don't wish to end it at all. I wish to continue the one we were having before the goalposts were shot into orbit.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 7, 2022 3:12:48 GMT
Again, I do not agree with your assessment, but if this is how you wish to end our conversation, I am fine with it. Freon
I don't wish to end it at all. I wish to continue the one we were having before the goalposts were shot into orbit.
It's called a segue, and it is a normal part of conversations. It relates the original topic, but transcends it into new and relevant directions. If you can't keep up, then maybe you need to find someone easier to communicate with. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 7, 2022 20:04:38 GMT
I don't wish to end it at all. I wish to continue the one we were having before the goalposts were shot into orbit.
It's called a segue, and it is a normal part of conversations. It relates the original topic, but transcends it into new and relevant directions. If you can't keep up, then maybe you need to find someone easier to communicate with. Freon
We've not finished talking about the topic we were on. If a celebrity went on a talk show to discuss their latest book, and right in the middle of a discussion about a specific chapter of the book, they "segue" into a discussion on their favorite music simply because music is mentioned in the book, the host would be rather confused.
"In this chapter, we have the main character entering the church in search of his enemy".
"And the enemy is there?"
"Yes"
"Where is the enemy?"
"Up near the front singing hymns as there is a mass going on".
"Interesting, why was this person his enemy?"
"My favorite music is rap. And I also like southern rock".
"OK, but...what does that have to do with the story you were telling about your book?"
"It's called a segue!"
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 7, 2022 20:16:03 GMT
It's called a segue, and it is a normal part of conversations. It relates the original topic, but transcends it into new and relevant directions. If you can't keep up, then maybe you need to find someone easier to communicate with. Freon
We've not finished talking about the topic we were on. If a celebrity went on a talk show to discuss their latest book, and right in the middle of a discussion about a specific chapter of the book, they "segue" into a discussion on their favorite music simply because music is mentioned in the book, the host would be rather confused.
"In this chapter, we have the main character entering the church in search of his enemy".
"And the enemy is there?"
"Yes"
"Where is the enemy?"
"Up near the front singing hymns as there is a mass going on".
"Interesting, why was this person his enemy?"
"My favorite music is rap. And I also like southern rock".
"OK, but...what does that have to do with the story you were telling about your book?"
"It's called a segue!"
In that context, I would agree, but we are not in that context. This is a forum. We are anonymous. No one is participating, but you and I. I'm in a super mood today, so tell me what you want to know, that you do not feel I answered, and I will try and be as concise as possible. I have nothing to hide. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 7, 2022 20:38:14 GMT
We've not finished talking about the topic we were on. If a celebrity went on a talk show to discuss their latest book, and right in the middle of a discussion about a specific chapter of the book, they "segue" into a discussion on their favorite music simply because music is mentioned in the book, the host would be rather confused.
"In this chapter, we have the main character entering the church in search of his enemy".
"And the enemy is there?"
"Yes"
"Where is the enemy?"
"Up near the front singing hymns as there is a mass going on".
"Interesting, why was this person his enemy?"
"My favorite music is rap. And I also like southern rock".
"OK, but...what does that have to do with the story you were telling about your book?"
"It's called a segue!"
In that context, I would agree, but we are not in that context. This is a forum. We are anonymous. No one is participating, but you and I. I'm in a super mood today, so tell me what you want to know, that you do not feel I answered, and I will try and be as concise as possible. I have nothing to hide. Freon
I'd like to know how, if not by assumption, you have arrived at the conclusion that extremeness of a stance is an indicator of willingness to negotiate.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 7, 2022 20:49:44 GMT
In that context, I would agree, but we are not in that context. This is a forum. We are anonymous. No one is participating, but you and I. I'm in a super mood today, so tell me what you want to know, that you do not feel I answered, and I will try and be as concise as possible. I have nothing to hide. Freon
I'd like to know how, if not by assumption, you have arrived at the conclusion that extremeness of a stance is an indicator of willingness to negotiate.
Certainly through conversations in here and IRL. I have yet to hear a single pro-birther in here agree that anything except a ban on abortion completely (I'm not including rape/incest, because it is minor, in terms of numbers, compared to general abortions) is desired. Same with guns. For six years, I've brought up the notion of compromise, and from Jasmine to Abe, the position is that ANY compromise, is viewed as complete defeat. Additionally, any position that is extreme, is by definition, overly-simplified, and philosophically opposed to negotiation. Abortion, to pro-birthers, is a binary topic. You either allow it, or you do not. Whereas pro-abortion, the position itself, is about WHEN abortion is allowed. Finally, watching the crazy far right in congress, once again, zero negotiation. So that is the data I am using to form my opinion. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 7, 2022 20:58:40 GMT
I'd like to know how, if not by assumption, you have arrived at the conclusion that extremeness of a stance is an indicator of willingness to negotiate.
Certainly through conversations in here and IRL. I have yet to hear a single pro-birther in here agree that anything except a ban on abortion completely (I'm not including rape/incest, because it is minor, in terms of numbers, compared to general abortions) is desired. Same with guns. For six years, I've brought up the notion of compromise, and from Jasmine to Abe, the position is that ANY compromise, is viewed as complete defeat. Additionally, any position that is extreme, is by definition, overly-simplified, and philosophically opposed to negotiation. Abortion, to pro-birthers, is a binary topic. You either allow it, or you do not. Whereas pro-abortion, the position itself, is about WHEN abortion is allowed. Finally, watching the crazy far right in congress, once again, zero negotiation. So that is the data I am using to form my opinion. Freon You are equating "desired" with "accepted". That is strange. The most anti-abortion people I know - here and IRL - have been borderline ecstatic over the Dobbs decision overturning Roe. They are well aware that the decision didn't completely ban abortion. It did nothing remotely close to that. It simply turned it over to the 50 laboratories of democracy to have their legislatures decide. It wasn't the far right that opposed democratic legislatures across the land making this decision. It was - by a lot - the far left that opposed this move by the court, preferring the pre-Dobbs position of the supreme court making that decision. With, by the way, no room for compromise. Almost all democrats in congress and almost all of the hardest left were 100% opposed, with no room to negotiate, to any decision by a court or to appoint justices to the court that would change the Roe decision in the direction of more room for states to choose within themselves. And I don't know what definition you are working from to come to the idea that "any position that is extreme, is by definition, overly-simplified, and philosophically opposed to negotiation". Ridiculous on its face. So I think this clears it up. That assumption was how you arrived at your conclusion. A false one at that. I need only to point to the founders of the US. They were extremists. But they negotiated and compromised all over the place. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 7, 2022 21:03:26 GMT
Certainly through conversations in here and IRL. I have yet to hear a single pro-birther in here agree that anything except a ban on abortion completely (I'm not including rape/incest, because it is minor, in terms of numbers, compared to general abortions) is desired. Same with guns. For six years, I've brought up the notion of compromise, and from Jasmine to Abe, the position is that ANY compromise, is viewed as complete defeat. Additionally, any position that is extreme, is by definition, overly-simplified, and philosophically opposed to negotiation. Abortion, to pro-birthers, is a binary topic. You either allow it, or you do not. Whereas pro-abortion, the position itself, is about WHEN abortion is allowed. Finally, watching the crazy far right in congress, once again, zero negotiation. So that is the data I am using to form my opinion. Freon You are equating "desired" with "accepted". That is strange. The most anti-abortion people I know - here and IRL - have been borderline ecstatic over the Dobbs decision overturning Roe. They are well aware that the decision didn't completely ban abortion. It did nothing remotely close to that. It simply turned it over to the 50 laboratories of democracy to have their legislatures decide. It wasn't the far right that opposed democratic legislatures across the land making this decision. It was - by a lot - the far left that opposed this move by the court, preferring the pre-Dobbs position of the supreme court making that decision. With, by the way, no room for compromise. Almost all democrats in congress and almost all of the hardest left were 100% opposed, with no room to negotiate, to any decision by a court or to appoint justices to the court that would change the Roe decision in the direction of more room for states to choose within themselves. And I don't know what definition you are working from to come to the idea that "any position that is extreme, is by definition, overly-simplified, and philosophically opposed to negotiation". Ridiculous on its face. So I think this clears it up. That assumption was how you arrived at your conclusion. A false one at that. I need only to point to the founders of the US. They were extremists. But they negotiated and compromised all over the place. The abortion debate had already been decided. And now the, 'laboratories', consist of 50 states, the majority which have already decided on abortion, and the rest, with a third to a half of the individual state's population, that also agree. So from a democratic perspective, those states are finding a way AROUND the majority position. That's not a laboratory. It's a loophole. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 7, 2022 21:06:31 GMT
You are equating "desired" with "accepted". That is strange. The most anti-abortion people I know - here and IRL - have been borderline ecstatic over the Dobbs decision overturning Roe. They are well aware that the decision didn't completely ban abortion. It did nothing remotely close to that. It simply turned it over to the 50 laboratories of democracy to have their legislatures decide. It wasn't the far right that opposed democratic legislatures across the land making this decision. It was - by a lot - the far left that opposed this move by the court, preferring the pre-Dobbs position of the supreme court making that decision. With, by the way, no room for compromise. Almost all democrats in congress and almost all of the hardest left were 100% opposed, with no room to negotiate, to any decision by a court or to appoint justices to the court that would change the Roe decision in the direction of more room for states to choose within themselves. And I don't know what definition you are working from to come to the idea that "any position that is extreme, is by definition, overly-simplified, and philosophically opposed to negotiation". Ridiculous on its face. So I think this clears it up. That assumption was how you arrived at your conclusion. A false one at that. I need only to point to the founders of the US. They were extremists. But they negotiated and compromised all over the place. The abortion debate had already been decided. LOL. Is this another segue? Because it isn't addressing the point. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 7, 2022 21:11:03 GMT
The abortion debate had already been decided. LOL. Is this another segue? Because it isn't addressing the point. Well if you find my first comment funny, then I guess the 2nd amendment is also open to reinterpretation. You can't have it both ways. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 7, 2022 21:32:01 GMT
LOL. Is this another segue? Because it isn't addressing the point. Well if you find my first comment funny, then I guess the 2nd amendment is also open to reinterpretation. You can't have it both ways. Freon Your comment was about whether a debate is decided. Do you really think the abortion debate is decided? The Dobbs decision expanded the debate.
And I guess this confirms we have quickly segued away from the topic again.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 7, 2022 21:35:37 GMT
Well if you find my first comment funny, then I guess the 2nd amendment is also open to reinterpretation. You can't have it both ways. Freon Your comment was about whether a debate is decided. Do you really think the abortion debate is decided? The Dobbs decision expanded the debate.
And I guess this confirms we have quickly segued away from the topic again.
I think we are still on it, and you did not answer my question. Again. Why do you keep not answering these questions which relate to the original topic? The goal is to show you that they relate, but you just don't want to see it. Or you can't. Not sure which says more about you. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 7, 2022 21:40:38 GMT
Your comment was about whether a debate is decided. Do you really think the abortion debate is decided? The Dobbs decision expanded the debate.
And I guess this confirms we have quickly segued away from the topic again.
I think we are still on it, and you did not answer my question. Again. Why do you keep not answering these questions which relate to the original topic? The goal is to show you that they relate, but you just don't want to see it. Or you can't. Not sure which says more about you. Freon
Which question? I don't see a question. And let's stick to discussing ideas, rather than personally attacking people.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 7, 2022 21:58:14 GMT
I think we are still on it, and you did not answer my question. Again. Why do you keep not answering these questions which relate to the original topic? The goal is to show you that they relate, but you just don't want to see it. Or you can't. Not sure which says more about you. Freon
Which question? I don't see a question. And let's stick to discussing ideas, rather than personally attacking people.
We are not mindless zombies, so WHO we are determines how we view these topics. You are teaching me, right now in this conversation, that who we are is not relevant to you. That we can have these conversations, abstractly as generic humans, instead of the reality that we are motivated by our ideologies. I find that perspective to be oblivious to the reality that who we are is the most important subject we can discuss, to understand the topic. And the desire to not discuss it, is itself highly informative, and separates us dramatically. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 7, 2022 22:02:09 GMT
Which question? I don't see a question. And let's stick to discussing ideas, rather than personally attacking people.
We are not mindless zombies, so WHO we are determines how we view these topics. You are teaching me, right now in this conversation, that who we are is not relevant to you. That we can have these conversations, abstractly as generic humans, instead of the reality that we are motivated by our ideologies. I find that perspective to be oblivious to the reality that who we are is the most important subject we can discuss, to understand the topic. And the desire to not discuss it, is itself highly informative, and separates us dramatically. Freon
You are disagreeing with the majority of us in polite society who are not interested in personal attacks while participating in political discussions.
You're personal attacks have ruined another discussion more than your assumptions and "segues" that go beyond segue ever could.
Let me know if you wish to actually stay on and discuss the topic we were discussing. If you want to pass personal attacks back and forth, I am not interested. It is boring and stupid.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 7, 2022 22:19:42 GMT
We are not mindless zombies, so WHO we are determines how we view these topics. You are teaching me, right now in this conversation, that who we are is not relevant to you. That we can have these conversations, abstractly as generic humans, instead of the reality that we are motivated by our ideologies. I find that perspective to be oblivious to the reality that who we are is the most important subject we can discuss, to understand the topic. And the desire to not discuss it, is itself highly informative, and separates us dramatically. Freon
You are disagreeing with the majority of us in polite society who are not interested in personal attacks while participating in political discussions.
You're personal attacks have ruined another discussion more than your assumptions and "segues" that go beyond segue ever could.
Let me know if you wish to actually stay on and discuss the topic we were discussing. If you want to pass personal attacks back and forth, I am not interested. It is boring and stupid.
It does not sound to me like you are capable of having this discussion. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 7, 2022 22:22:45 GMT
I'd like to know how, if not by assumption, you have arrived at the conclusion that extremeness of a stance is an indicator of willingness to negotiate.
Certainly through conversations in here and IRL. I have yet to hear a single pro-birther in here agree that anything except a ban on abortion completely (I'm not including rape/incest, because it is minor, in terms of numbers, compared to general abortions) is desired. That's actually not true. I explicitly stated that as a "pro-birther" an absolute and complete ban on abortion is undesirable. And I said that directly to you. |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 8, 2022 0:34:13 GMT
You are disagreeing with the majority of us in polite society who are not interested in personal attacks while participating in political discussions.
You're personal attacks have ruined another discussion more than your assumptions and "segues" that go beyond segue ever could.
Let me know if you wish to actually stay on and discuss the topic we were discussing. If you want to pass personal attacks back and forth, I am not interested. It is boring and stupid.
It does not sound to me like you are capable of having this discussion. Freon
Plenty capable, but unwilling, to have a discussion that consists merely of personal attacks like this one. I prefer our original discussion which was not about personally attacking me. But rather about ideas and policy positions.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jul 8, 2022 3:52:20 GMT
It does not sound to me like you are capable of having this discussion. Freon
Plenty capable, but unwilling, to have a discussion that consists merely of personal attacks like this one. I prefer our original discussion which was not about personally attacking me. But rather about ideas and policy positions.
Such thin skin. I thought you righties were tougher than that, but like Donald, any criticism, and you become flip-out offended. If we're done, I'm happy. I would rather talk to people who have more confidence in themselves and their positions. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Jul 8, 2022 12:18:10 GMT
Plenty capable, but unwilling, to have a discussion that consists merely of personal attacks like this one. I prefer our original discussion which was not about personally attacking me. But rather about ideas and policy positions.
Such thin skin. I thought you righties were tougher than that, but like Donald, any criticism, and you become flip-out offended. If we're done, I'm happy. I would rather talk to people who have more confidence in themselves and their positions. Freon
I have plenty of confidence in myself and my positions. If you would like to discuss positions, I have been and continue to be willing to discuss them. But if your only desired discussion is one of personal attacks, like I said, that is boring and stupid, so you can have that with yourself.
|
|
