Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Shop
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Is there an Atheist preference for the Democratic party going on here?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ana the Ist" data-source="post: 76855217" data-attributes="member: 302807"><p>Are you a guy who likes to consider the probabilistic likelihood of outcomes sometimes known as a "betting man" [USER=443673]@BPPLEE[/USER] ?</p><p></p><p>Because we've hit that sort of point in the thread wherein the person I've engaged with is given a chance to explain themselves and if it's an explanation that doesn't substantially differ in any way to the one I gave....</p><p></p><p>Then we can safely guess his reply will be....</p><p></p><p>1. An attack on my character, ad hominems, etc....which I just see as evidence that I am completely correct about what he meant by "inequalities".</p><p></p><p>2. Ignoring me/refusing to answer/leaving....which I also see as evidence that I'm correct.</p><p></p><p>3. A completely different explanation for the word "inequalities" that in no way refers to racial disparities....or at least refers to them in such a different manner than I have, that there's some meaningful difference I would have to acknowledge.</p><p></p><p>I'm already pretty sure I'd put it at #1 = 49%, #2 =49%.....and number #3 = 2%. </p><p></p><p>And I'm only giving #3 2% because it's at least possible, right? I don't recall it ever happening....but it might some day.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ana the Ist, post: 76855217, member: 302807"] Are you a guy who likes to consider the probabilistic likelihood of outcomes sometimes known as a "betting man" [USER=443673]@BPPLEE[/USER] ? Because we've hit that sort of point in the thread wherein the person I've engaged with is given a chance to explain themselves and if it's an explanation that doesn't substantially differ in any way to the one I gave.... Then we can safely guess his reply will be.... 1. An attack on my character, ad hominems, etc....which I just see as evidence that I am completely correct about what he meant by "inequalities". 2. Ignoring me/refusing to answer/leaving....which I also see as evidence that I'm correct. 3. A completely different explanation for the word "inequalities" that in no way refers to racial disparities....or at least refers to them in such a different manner than I have, that there's some meaningful difference I would have to acknowledge. I'm already pretty sure I'd put it at #1 = 49%, #2 =49%.....and number #3 = 2%. And I'm only giving #3 2% because it's at least possible, right? I don't recall it ever happening....but it might some day. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Is there an Atheist preference for the Democratic party going on here?
Top
Bottom