|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 6, 2024 16:40:39 GMT
Saying that I do not know exactly why you chose to park on the grass is not new? And.. aww, you didn't answer my questions. Hey, don't let the grass grow around your feet... ... saying you don't know exactly why I parked on the grass is nothing new. .. Stop the silly guessing game and just admit that you simply do not know. Much as I enjoy a good diversionary quibble, more importantly you still haven't answered my questions. Evasion noted.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Feb 6, 2024 18:40:18 GMT
If they CHOOSE to have babies, the 'choice' side cares JUST as much about supporting their choice and helping them, don't they? They could perhaps care more but I think they certainly care more than the pro-life crowd. Generally (though admittedly not always) pro-choice advocates also argue for childcare programmes, higher minimum wage, child benefit etc, all of which make it easier for women to choose to have a baby. Whereas the pro-life crowd generally (and again to be fair, not always) are against such programmes. The US having such a high abortion rate compared to some much more pro-choice countries I think hammers this point home. The more pro-life approach is not an abortion crackdown, but making parenthood less of a burden.
We got a higher minimum wage, pre-Covid fast food workers complained $10 an hour wasn't enough to move out of their parents' homes, they NEEDED $15 an hour and then they could afford a life of their own. They got that $15 an hour minimum wage and more, and they're still complaining they can't afford to live off it. Pre-Covid, people warned higher minimum wage would equal higher everything else, and we were told ohhhh no, if minimum wage went up, prices would stay the same, and $15 an hour would mean burger flippers could have their own homes and cars and nice things, etc. Instead the housing market is a disaster, a lot of people are having to make do with 1-2 meals per day, companies lay off thousands of workers in response to now having to pay $20/hr minimum wage, and full time workers get their hours cut to 15-20 hours per week. Do we really think the same actions would've been taken if minimum wage was still $10 an hour?
But the other side of it is, it's fine to argue FOR things...but people who say they 'care', aren't always known for putting their money where their mouth is. They're all in favor of something, as long as someone else has to foot the bill. And this is why, in this aspect anyway, I am not a hypocrite. People love to say pro-lifers don't actually do anything to help, etc., I would be a much richer person if that were true. Every year I buy $100-200 worth of toys for the Christmas drive, the food bank, every month, money to St. Jude's every October at every gas station taking donations, every Jerry's Kids drive, every local medical fundraiser jar at every business, every library reading program/schoolbook fundraiser. During last year's school supply drive I bought $60 worth of phonics cards and K-3rd work books for reading, spelling, vocabulary, math and science. How many 'pro-choicers' who claim they care about the ALREADY BORN children, would care to say the same?
Or here's a question, since we're told Planned Parenthood isn't JUST about abortions, and oh yes they care so much about the women who want to keep their babies too...do they offer those women free diapers, formula, bottles, baby clothes, maternity clothes, etc.? They offer free birth control, do they offer free anything to women actually starting their families?
It just seems so ironic the same political side that justifies abortion because of all the suffering kids and women in this country, also said it was racist to put them first. Suddenly they can take the back of the line along with Veterans and the homeless, so people who aren't even citizens can come in, get free food, prepaid credit cards and live in hotel rooms for free. I wonder why American women and children weren't worthy of that same aid?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 6, 2024 22:20:25 GMT
... saying you don't know exactly why I parked on the grass is nothing new. .. Stop the silly guessing game and just admit that you simply do not know. Much as I enjoy a good diversionary quibble, more importantly you still haven't answered my questions. Evasion noted. Wrong again. I would say please try again, but there's really no need.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 8, 2024 22:41:19 GMT
Much as I enjoy a good diversionary quibble, more importantly you still haven't answered my questions. Evasion noted. Wrong again. I would say please try again, but there's really no need. Still no answer. Evasion still noted.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 8, 2024 23:30:19 GMT
Wrong again. I would say please try again, but there's really no need. Still no answer. Evasion still noted. For the last time, the correct answer is: "I don't know why you parked on the grass."
Thanks for playing.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 10, 2024 12:00:52 GMT
Still no answer. Evasion still noted. For the last time, the correct answer is: "I don't know why you parked on the grass."
Thanks for playing. Hey remember this? FF: "Suppose we say that, although I am likely to have a very good idea why most mundane actions happen, I will accept that I do not know exactly why you chose to park on the grass." ? I do. Still no answer to my question then. Is there a problem?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 10, 2024 22:39:33 GMT
For the last time, the correct answer is: "I don't know why you parked on the grass."
Thanks for playing. Hey remember this? FF: "Suppose we say that, although I am likely to have a very good idea why most mundane actions happen, I will accept that I do not know exactly why you chose to park on the grass." ? I do. I seem to recall the word "exactly" being stressed with italics. Is there is a difference between not knowing something and not exactly knowing something? Because so far, your wild guesses haven't been even remotely close. Yes, the problem is the same as it always is when we chat: you're lost in your own weeds again and have completely lost focus as usual. "I do not know why God ordered the massacres of the past." imdb2.freeforums.net/post/6045493/thread
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Feb 11, 2024 0:05:07 GMT
I once was trying to get out of the national bank and got stucked at the automatic door with a man who starts to joke: don’t worry, getting out is always easier than getting into! Yack yack yack. Looked at him, smiled, then ”indeed, men will never birth babies into life and out of their wombs.” When in the xxith century women need to abort because ”they can’t” care of their youngs it’s a political failure.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 12, 2024 20:58:37 GMT
Is there is a difference between not knowing something and not exactly knowing something? Still no answer to my question. Evasion noted, third (or is it fourth?) time. I don't know exactly why you are not answering, but I know full well the most common reasons for evasion in dispute.
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Feb 12, 2024 23:17:22 GMT
Instead of ”accepting” why not concede it , Film flaneur, dear? Imho Admin could admit that you ”do not know exactly why Admin parked on the grass” is a correct answer. But why not concede it ? It’s not going to Hurt you. And if it hurts your pride, i’ll blow à Kiss on it.Promise. Your pride is not you. I bet what’s not your pride is very lovable, dear. Xoxo
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 12, 2024 23:29:49 GMT
Instead of ”accepting” why not concede it , Film flaneur, dear? Imho Admin could admit that you ”do not know exactly why Admin parked on the grass” is a correct answer. But why not concede it ? Because there is nothing more to concede when I have already said that I accept that I do not know exactly why he chose to park on the grass. IMHO Admin is just ignoring this fact and repeating things anyway to avoid my question - something which is far more pertinent than this old diversion of his. Indeed in this case, now after reflection, I am confident I know exactly why he doesn't answer. It seems obvious. So there we have it, dear.
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Feb 13, 2024 0:16:04 GMT
Instead of ”accepting” why not concede it , Film flaneur, dear? Imho Admin could admit that you ”do not know exactly why Admin parked on the grass” is a correct answer. But why not concede it ? Because there is nothing more to concede when I have already said that I accept that I do not know exactly why he chose to park on the grass. IMHO Admin is just ignoring this fact and repeating things anyway to avoid my question - something which is far more pertinent than this old diversion of his. Indeed in this case, now after reflection, I am confident I know exactly why he doesn't answer. It seems obvious. So there we have it, dear. Hush, puppy. I understand that it does hurt your pride, conceding instead of accepting. Yes, you wrote it. After pages, and Admin has been an angel of patience with you. Come on, please. Admin’s pride must be tingling too. A tad. But Admin is certainly not going to write that you did not wrote it. Xoxo
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 14, 2024 21:53:56 GMT
Instead of ”accepting” why not concede it , Film flaneur, dear? Imho Admin could admit that you ”do not know exactly why Admin parked on the grass” is a correct answer. But why not concede it ? Because there is nothing more to concede when I have already said that I accept that I do not know exactly why he chose to park on the grass. IMHO Admin is just ignoring this fact and repeating things anyway to avoid my question - something which is far more pertinent than this old diversion of his. Indeed in this case, now after reflection, I am confident I know exactly why he doesn't answer. It seems obvious. So there we have it, dear. I honestly have no clue what you're babbling about. You asked why God ordered massacres, and I said I didn't know. Ironically enough, that's the answer to both questions, but only one of us is admitting it, and it ain't you.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 14, 2024 23:29:36 GMT
Because there is nothing more to concede when I have already said that I accept that I do not know exactly why he chose to park on the grass. IMHO Admin is just ignoring this fact and repeating things anyway to avoid my question - something which is far more pertinent than this old diversion of his. Indeed in this case, now after reflection, I am confident I know exactly why he doesn't answer. It seems obvious. So there we have it, dear. I honestly have no clue what you're babbling about. You asked why God ordered massacres, and I said I didn't know. Ironically enough, that's the answer to both questions, but only one of us is admitting it, and it ain't you. Here is that question again, (which was not about motive but the perception of hypocrisy and special pleading in regards to the unacceptable), so that you do know all about it and stop with the evasion: ... I will accept that I do not know exactly why you chose to park on the grass. But let us say further that you have long been famous for condemning those who park on the grass in the widest and strongest possible terms. Is the claim that you 'work in mysterious ways' enough to justify your actions and counter the claim of moral hypocrisy? And would it persuade the officer who gives you a ticket for bad parking? If you really don't know the most reasonable answers to these questions, I can help you out.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 14, 2024 23:52:23 GMT
I honestly have no clue what you're babbling about. You asked why God ordered massacres, and I said I didn't know. Ironically enough, that's the answer to both questions, but only one of us is admitting it, and it ain't you. Here is that question again, so that you do know all about it and stop with the evasion: ... I will accept that I do not know exactly why you chose to park on the grass. But let us say further that you have long been famous for condemning those who park on the grass in the widest and strongest possible terms. Is the claim that you 'work in mysterious ways' enough to justify your actions and counter the claim of moral hypocrisy? And would it persuade the officer who gives you a ticket for bad parking? If you really don't know the answers to these questions, I can help you out. Oh, that. I just figured you were trying to make some twisted point and didn't give a second thought. At any rate, I don't claim that I work in mysterious ways. I know why I parked on the grass. If you know anyone who says God works in mysterious ways to justify his actions and counter the claim of moral hypocrisy, take it up with them. All I'm saying in this regard is what I've already said several times. Here's the crux: It's reasonable and perfectly acceptable to say a woman works in mysterious ways when we don't know why she had an abortion, but when the same is said about God, it's a cop-out. And all you've done since then is underscore that statement (unintentionally, it would seem) and blame me for following you into the weeds.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 15, 2024 0:29:43 GMT
I don't claim that I work in mysterious ways. I know why I parked on the grass. But, er, you have spent umpteen exchanges demanding to be told that I don't know why you did it i.e. showing you work in mysterious ways to others.And this is evasion again, since I just said this is not about motive, but perceived moral hypocrisy, about which you, still, remain strangely silent. I have done in the past, and usually do much to the discomfort of believers, but thank you anyway. But, in regards to my question and your own hypothetical case... evasion noted. The relevance here is this: if God knows what ought to work to bring many more to a conviction of His existence and therefore to salvation, and yet doesn't, isn't he a hypocrite for not permitting a lot of people to be saved through an effective informed choice, when that He tell us is best for all? If you agree that's a QED. LOL. See below, but I am sure this has carefully been explained before. Or you ought to be able to work it out for yourself. Indeed; and do so here too. Have you understood what you have just written? An aborting woman is not the same as deity whose preferences and condemnations are widely advertised in scripture and by whose example and rules we might be expected to be led. A woman choosing an abortion is not otherwise telling us all to follow her advice and proscriptions re: the sanctity of life, let alone threatening dire consequences for not. What I blame you, still, for not answering a simple question and so still being evasive. Why can't you just agree that saying one thing and doing another is hypocrisy the smell of which which special pleading fails to hide? It is quite reasonable to see this when God wishes all souls to be saved to their benefit, knows what would work better, and yet doesn't act to make the process more successful - or, indeed, condemns murder and yet authorises/instigates the mass killing of men, women and children. edited: aborted woman para corrected to make sense
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 15, 2024 0:36:04 GMT
I don't claim that I work in mysterious ways. I know why I parked on the grass. But, er, you have spent umpteen exchanges demanding to be told that I don't why you did it i.e. and so showing you work in mysterious ways to others.And this is evasion again, since I just said this is not about motive, but perceived moral hypocrisy, about which you still remain strangely silent. I have done in the past, and usually do much to the discomfort of believers, but thank you anyway. But, in regards to my question and your own hypothetical case... evasion noted. The relevance here is this: if God knows what ought to work to bring many more to a conviction of His existence and therefore to salvation, and yet doesn't, isn't he a hypocrite for not permitting a lot of people to be saved through an effective informed choice, when that He tell us is best for all? If you agree that's a QED. LOL. See below, but I am sure this has carefully been explained before. Or you ought to be able to work it out for yourself. Indeed; and do so here too. Have you understood what you have just written? An aborting woman is not the same as deity whose preferences and condemnations are widely advertised in scripture and by whose example and rules we might be expected to be led. A woman choosing an abortion is not telling us all to follow her advice and example let alone threatening dire consequences for not. What I blame you, still, for not answering a simple question and so still being evasive. Why can't you just agree that saying one thing and doing another is hypocrisy which special pleading fails to quash? It is quite reasonable to see this when God wishes all souls to be saved to their benefit, knows what would work better, and yet doesn't act to make the process more successful - or, indeed, condemns murder and yet authorises/instigates the mass killing of men, women and children. I'm not reading any more of your quote chopping. Learn how to have an honest discussion or find someone else who hasn't yet reached this point with you. Perhaps Filmboards will humor you more than I ever have.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 15, 2024 0:48:09 GMT
I'm not reading any more of your quote chopping. The only quote lately was one from you of me. Evasion still noted.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 15, 2024 0:52:26 GMT
I'm not reading any more of your quote chopping. The only quote lately was one from you of me. Evasion still noted. ps. Nobody cares about your neurotic "notations," but the hypocrisy is always entertaining. Don't forget the "ad hom" and the "QED".
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 15, 2024 0:56:40 GMT
The only quote lately was one from you of me. Evasion still noted. ps. Nobody cares about your neurotic "notations," but the hypocrisy is always entertaining. Don't forget the "ad hom" and the "QED". Nope, still not an answer to my question(s) to be found....
|
|