Logical fallacies

A few years ago when “gay marriage” was on the ballot here, a famous nightclub put up a billboard that parroted the “You can’t control who you love” party line. Around the same time, a blogger asserted that “marriage equity for all” was his goal.     Yet, when pressed, its clear that these folks on the political left don’t really mean what they say.   They always have exceptions for “all”.   Yet, the same arguments used for “gay marriage” also work for any number of other loving relationships.

At the time, folks on the political right were suggesting that “gay marriage” was only the first step towards normalization of other sexual attractions.  While those on the left said “Foul, slippery slope logical fallacy”.

Yet, as we see pedophilia being spoken of in academic settings as just one more “sexual preference”, the wholesale denial of biology as it relates to gender, and leftist political parties in Europe, and the UN, working to protect child marriage, one wonders when the slippery slope moves from fallacy to reality.

We see vociferous criticism of child marriage or slavery when our 21st century mores are retroactively applied to Olt Testament stories, yet silence about those things happening in the present.  

I suspect that some of the silence is related to the popular leftist narratives regarding certain cultures and the all around wonderful nature of multiculturalism without questions.

Like many things, it just makes you wonder.

I've failed.

When I left for vacation last week, my intention was to avoid commenting or interacting with anything said on any of the blogs I follow.  Primarily because I was unaware that I would have as much internet access as I do.

However, there were two comments made in the verbal srcum that is the recent thread at Dan's that I couldn't resist.  I'm doing this here for a couple of reasons.  Mostly because adding another voice to a long and meandering thread didn't seem helpful, also because having more internet than I thought I'd have doesn't translate into having the same coverage I'd have at home.

If you want the context, go to Dan's.

"Can you at least understand how a person of good faith and great love for the Bible might reach that conclusion?"

Yes, I can understand how that could, happen.

The counter question is.  Dan, can you understand how a person of good faith and great love for the Bible could reach a conclusion other than the one you have?   Or put another way.  Are you willing to grant those who disagree with you the same level of understanding and courtesy you ask from them?

  "I'm just noting the reality that God is not an intervener God's own Self."

To this is simply say bullshit.

I've got a 22 year old son who wouldn't be out riding an ATV up the side of a 14,000 foot mountain with his mother, if "God wasn't an intervener".

So, with all respect, bullshit.

“You came responding, but not answering the claim, and did so in a rude and non-humble manner.”

“See the difference? A bit of humility will take you a long way in life, sir.”

It’s always amusing when someone points out their own flaws in others.  




Note:

Feo, I know your obsessed with commenting here without having done what you've been asked to do (detailed, specific plan with definitions of terms),  that restriction still stands.   

Hiram

Hiram,

I want to apologize to you.  Apparently I had my blogger settings at their default positions, which only allows people with blogger accounts to comment.  This was inadvertent, and I apologize.  

The reason I started this blog was because I was discriminated against for not having a blogger account by a so called supporter of inclusiveness and tolerance.   I didn’t intend to have this be that place.

But I’ve changed that.  I’m open to everyone.  

Welcome.

Just another random quote.

“What a mess pride makes when it creeps into our Bible reading. Arrogance in reading mutes an author before he starts talking. It is rude to do it to human writers, and fatal to do it to God.”

Would that this was our prayer

Father, we call Thee Father because we love Thee. We are glad to be called Thy children, and to dedicate our lives to the service that extends through willing hearts and hands to the betterment of all mankind [humankind]. We send a cry of Thanksgiving for people of all races, creeds, classes, and colors the world over, and pray that through the instrumentality of our lives the spirit of peace, joy, fellowship, and brotherhood [personhood] shall circle the world. We know that this world is filled with discordant notes, but help us, Father, to so unite our efforts that we may all join in one harmonious symphony for peace and brotherhood [personhood], justice, and equality of opportunity for all men [people]. The tasks performed today with forgiveness for all our errors, we dedicate, dear Lord, to Thee. Grant us strength and courage and faith and humility sufficient for the tasks assigned to us. 

---

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

LEAVE A REPLY.

RSS Feed

Misdemeanors

I’ve seen multiple people argue that crossing the border (once) without going through the process is a misdemeanor, and that it’s not a crime.  

Yet, when it comes to the actions of those we disagree with politically, all of a solution Deb conviction for a misdemeanor makes one a “criminal”

“ I will, however, cite an article about how he was convicted of placing a GPS tracer on his wife's car (a misdemeanor, but creepy-sounding, at the very least) and note that here is another instance of the GOP running a criminal””

A misdemeanor is either a crime, or it’s not, please pick one standard and stick with it.

What would it look like?

Jesus tells us to “Bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.”.

If we actually tried to live this out, what would blogging and social media look like?

I’ll admit that blessing certain folk isn’t my first reaction, but what if it was?