- Oct 29, 2017
- 54,680
- 8,035
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Private
NonsenseThe difference is in intent. If she had no intent to carry the fetus to term the law would not apply.
Upvote
0
NonsenseThe difference is in intent. If she had no intent to carry the fetus to term the law would not apply.
As ever politics makes for strange bedfellows, The Firearms Policy Coalition has filed an amicus brief siding with those opposing the law. They take no position on abortion but argue, as others have done on this forum, that if let to stand other states will make use of this mechanism to go after second amendment rights.
The feigned ignorance about Roe is beyond tiresom.Killing babies isn't a right; but if there are some who want to sue gangstas, who are suspected of violating state firearms laws; let them have at it. It's a wonder that all of their living victims haven't sued them for all of the mayhem they spread throughout urban neighborhoods. I wonder why not.
The feigned ignorance about Roe is beyond tiresom.
Outraged while pretending to know nothing about their contents?I feel the same way concerning the Declaration of Independence, and the 9th and 10th Amendments.
Outraged while pretending to know nothing about their contents?
Nope, carry on without me mr Colombo.I don't understand the question. Can you present it as a sentence?
Nonsense
Wait! You can't do that. You are pitting one single issue "conservative" voter against another.As ever politics makes for strange bedfellows, The Firearms Policy Coalition has filed an amicus brief siding with those opposing the law. They take no position on abortion but argue, as others have done on this forum, that if let to stand other states will make use of this mechanism to go after second amendment rights.
Wonderful isn't it?Wait! You can't do that. You are pitting one single issue "conservative" voter against another.
When a person can only reply "Nonsense" to a cogent argument he has admitted defeat.
Thank you for owning up to your error.
Incorrect. You also do so to posts that you have no answer to. But then you are doing what one of your sources implied that you would. You are abusing the law to try to support a belief that it does not support at all.I often reply "nonsense" to ridiculous bare assertion fallacies; but it was fun to watch you double down.
Thanks for playing.
Incorrect. You also do so to posts that you have no answer to. But then you are doing what one of your sources implied that you would. You are abusing the law to try to support a belief that it does not support at all.
Sorry, it does not work that way. You failed You would need to quote the sections of the law that showed me to be wrong.I cited the law to back my assertion. You didn't. Case closed. Game over.
Sorry, it does not work that way. You failed You would need to quote the sections of the law that showed me to be wrong.
That is what I pointed out. You took on the burden of proof with an incorrect "refutation". The proper strategy was to have left the burden of proof upon me, instead you went charging ahead without thinking out the consequences of your post.See: Burden of Proof
That is what I pointed out. You took on the burden of proof with an incorrect "refutation". The proper strategy was to have left the burden of proof upon me, instead you went charging ahead without thinking out the consequences of your post.
And you took up the burden of proof by making a statement without any reasoning behind it. Remember? I asked you to support your case to show that you had reasoning behind it. You did not do so. You could have done the same with me, but it is a bit too late for that now.Burden of Proof
A fallacy is when someone makes an argument based on unsound reasoning. Burden of proof is one type of fallacy in which someone makes a claim, but puts the burden of proof onto the other side. For example, a person makes a claim. Another person refutes the claim, and the first person asks them to prove that the claim is not true. In a logical argument, if someone states a claim, it is up to that person to prove the truth of his or her claim.
Burden of Proof Examples
And you took up the burden of proof by making a statement without any reasoning behind it. Remember? I asked you to support your case to show that you had reasoning behind it. You did not do so. You could have done the same with me, but it is a bit too late for that now.
I did, please note the past tense, have a burden of proof to support my claim, but you did not ask me to do that. You took on the burden of proof all on your own with your own unsupported claim.