You just committed two more logical fallacies, thanks for proving my point so perfectly lol
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.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Why Do You Believe What You Believe?
- Thread starter Lightbringer
- Start date
You just committed two more logical fallacies, thanks for proving my point so perfectly lol
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
Yeah, Chickenhead isn't very smart is he?
I truly am laughing at you, you illiterate fucking moron. Your shitty reading skills are beyond comprehension.
I never said that Washington made any statements about the General Welfare Clause. I said he, like Hamilton, was a proponent of a strong central government and cited his Farewell Address, which Hamilton helped write, as evidence. But for you, lazy cunt, 32 pages was too long.
What I did cite as specifics of the use of the General Welfare Clause were the three SCOTUS cases, Social Security and Medicare.
You really should shut the fuck up and quit humiliating yourself. I enjoy it, but you prove yourself to be a massively ignorant fool.
This discussion is about the so-called general welfare clause, and your claim that there is such a construct in the Constitution when it was signed. You tried to use Washington's farewell address to bolster your argument, and now you are walking that back. lol
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
This discussion is about the so-called general welfare clause, and your claim that there is such a construct in the Constitution when it was signed. You tried to use Washington's farewell address to bolster your argument, and now you are walking that back. lol
I'm torn. I disagree with your take on General Welfare but I love seeing you rip on Chickenhead.
Yeah, Chickenhead isn't very smart is he?
He says he is, but we see no evidence in support. Very Zippy-ish lol
I'm torn. I disagree with your take on General Welfare but I love seeing you rip on Chickenhead.
Do you agree with the admitted cocksucker that the Founders intended the so-called general welfare clause to be 180 degrees in conflict with what it's writer stated it was? lol
You just committed two more logical fallacies, thanks for proving my point so perfectly lol
Sure I did, bitch. Identify them. Prove them.
This discussion is about the so-called general welfare clause, and your claim that there is such a construct in the Constitution when it was signed. You tried to use Washington's farewell address to bolster your argument, and now you are walking that back. lol
There is a construct, idiot. Article 1, Section 8. How many times does that need to be pointed out?
I used Washington's Farewell Address as evidence of his position on a strong central government. Read posts #213 and 214, illiterate fuck.
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
Do you agree with the admitted cocksucker that the Founders intended the so-called general welfare clause to be 180 degrees in conflict with what it's writer stated it was? lol
There were many founders Right. You don't get to pretend the Constitution was the result of a monolithic effort to write a document that reflects your beliefs.
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
There is a construct, idiot. Article 1, Section 8. How many times does that need to be pointed out?
I used Washington's Farewell Address as evidence of his position on a strong central government. Read posts #213 and 214, illiterate fuck.
Hey Chickenhead, he's fucking with you.
Yeah, Chickenhead isn't very smart is he?
lol
Guille-tard, I just crapped something with more intelligence than both of you combined.
Hey Chickenhead, he's fucking with you.
No. He's massively stupid.
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
lol
Guille-tard, I just crapped something with more intelligence than both of you combined.
Name dash tard. Yep, Chickenhead strained himself on that one.
There were many founders Right. You don't get to pretend the Constitution was the result of a monolithic effort to write a document that reflects your beliefs.
Was that a yes or no lol?
Sure I did, bitch. Identify them. Prove them.
1. Danth's Law: "If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly." http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Danth's_Law
2. Argumentum ad hominem (from the Latin, "to the man") is an informal logical fallacy that occurs when someone attempts to refute an argument by attacking the claim-maker, rather than engaging in an argument or factual refutation of the claim. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
lol
1. Danth's Law: "If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly." http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Danth's_Law
2. Argumentum ad hominem (from the Latin, "to the man") is an informal logical fallacy that occurs when someone attempts to refute an argument by attacking the claim-maker, rather than engaging in an argument or factual refutation of the claim. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
lol
lol
1) I claim to have kicked your ass because I have. Multiple times. Danth's Law? That's a logical fallacy? Sure it is, illiterate clod.
2) I refer to you as an illiterate fuctard because it's a fact. I have provided every piece of information to validate my claim. You? Zero.
Once again, massive failure on your part.
Keep flailing, bitch. It's amusing.
I'd like to know why Republican voters support Trump, the biggest RINO if ever there was one. He's not conservative, has zero respect for religion or family values, has authoritarian personality traits, is a thousand times more corrupt than Hillary and Bill Clinton combined, and engages in almost incestuous nepotism. What's the appeal?
I'd like to know why Republican voters support Trump, the biggest RINO if ever there was one. He's not conservative, has zero respect for religion or family values, has authoritarian personality traits, is a thousand times more corrupt than Hillary and Bill Clinton combined, and engages in almost incestuous nepotism. What's the appeal?
The appeal is libs like you being so pissed off...
lol
1) I claim to have kicked your ass because I have. Multiple times. Danth's Law? That's a logical fallacy? Sure it is, illiterate clod.
2) I refer to you as an illiterate fuctard because it's a fact. I have provided every piece of information to validate my claim. You? Zero.
Once again, massive failure on your part.
Keep flailing, bitch. It's amusing.
Oh look, more logical fallacies:
1. There are weaker forms of Danth's Law, for example: Anyone claiming that their opponent’s argument is making the opponent look silly or stupid etc, or that they are just digging themselves into a deeper hole, is really concerned that they themselves are being made to look silly, or stupid etc, or have fallen into a deep hole. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Danth's_Law#Corollaries
2. Denialism is the refusal to accept well-established theory, law, fact or evidence. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Denialism
lol
The appeal is libs like you being so pissed off...
I thought maybe you wanted to destroy the government from the inside, or you hated government so much that you wanted a president you could look down on. Don't disappoint me now.