Change for the better

Started by Queensryche, November 11, 2013, 10:37:34 AM

Previous topic - Next topic


Quote from: piperspitt on December 21, 2013, 08:13:53 PM
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink fits perfectly here. I certainly can't stop you from namecalling or lying and I can't make you understand something that you refuse to understand or can't understand so I will be done here as well.

Hey.  Scale it back a bit there, no need to attack other users.  I know you sure love to argue with people, but we've never allowed flaming other users and namecalling here.

"Opinion is really the lowest form of human knowledge. It requires no accountability, no understanding. The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world." - Bill Bullard


Quote from: Theren on December 22, 2013, 11:09:02 PM
There is the first obvious mistake in logic, you use wikipedia as a reliable source of information. We are talking about the website that for an extended period of time said that Stephen Colbert invented the elephant. According the Merriam Webster dictionary

noun \ˈlī\
Definition of LIE
a :  an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive
b :  an untrue or inaccurate statement that may or may not be believed true by the speaker
:  something that misleads or deceives

Wikipedia is actually fairly reliable. The only reason why that statement was in there was because Stephen Colbert encouraged his users to put it in. And Wikipedia, being the humorless bureaucrats they are, banned Colbert's account from the site, but that's beside the point.

My statement that Antonin Scalia is a homophobe is an opinion. I come to that conclusion based on statements in his judicial opinions which lead me to that conclusion. Piper thinks my opinion is incorrect. No problem, it's a different opinion (though one I strongly disagree with). But to call me a liar is an outright insult, not to mention logically faulty as well. I did not say that with the knowledge that Scalia isn't a homophobe, and I'm not saying it with intent to deceive.


You are missing the entire point of the definition I posted, it says that something untrue or inaccurate is still defined as a lie even if the person saying it believes it to be true. Therefore, by his reasoning, you are stating something or repeating something that is inaccurate or not the whole truth, therefore it is a lie even if you believe it to be true by the dictionary definition of what a lie is. I don't think you are being intolerant towards people and are trying to slander someone, but I have trouble understanding how saying that a state has the right to make a law against sodomy the same way they have a right to make a law against other things is calling it the same as those other things. That's like saying that anything that can result in prison time are all the exact same thing as far as the law makers are concerned. Also, why is it that anytime someone says something about sodomy the only thing that people think is homosexuality, they are not the same thing.
Clear the Way into a Pop You One. Why? Cause I want my card.


Debating the definition of "lie" isn't going to take us anywhere good, I think. QR has flagged his statements as opinions, let's leave it at that.

My 2 cents: the government has WAY better things to regulate than sodomy. As a heterosexual male, I still find that law absurd. Should laws have moral bases? I was going to say yes, but I'm not all that sure. My morality isn't necessarily the same as anyone else's.
Nate Weiss, Retired Dealer
"You're no fun." -Creed
Timing question? Look here.
Evidence is everything in a court of law. Evidence is also everything in the Rules Forum.