(Here's something we don't see every day)
I don't agree to disagree. People who are against abortions are wrong, and I'm right. It's a simple fact.
67 comments
We should see more of this. I love using the fundies behavior against them. When they have an unshakeable conviction of their own righteousness, I adopt the same attitude of total unthinking conviction of my own opinion and watch them beat their head against a brick wall.
Well, he's obviously a troll (could tell even without Yule Goat's subtle hint), so I don't place any judgement on him personally...but arguments like that don't exactly elevate you above the fundie pro-"life"rs.
I think that either this guy was a little confused at the time(and he meant the opposite)or it´s a troll, or, the living case that this is fundies say the darnest thing, not just Christians.
I agree with Mister Spak. I think that "Asimov's" namesake would not be too happy about his logic-less style here, but there is something sublimely symmetrical about fighting conservative fundie obstinacy with liberal fundie obstinacy.
I recall someone once saying that you couldn't fight the rabid pro-life platform without being equally rabid in the other direction to start with. The one side says "every pregnancy must end in birth." The pro-choice concept is too moderate to take on such an extremist view. The way to counter it is to adopt the position "every pregnancy must be terminated before birth." It's just as extreme.
THEN you can whittle away the extremes and arrive somewhere in the middle ground.
So yes.. in some sense, there is something worthy in two opposite extremes canceling each other out.
Fundies are unable to process logic and nuance, so trying to explain and defend a rational abortion policy is a waste of time. Just go for energetic unapologetic ass kicking, and save logic for those who can apreciate and understand it.
This is like fighting fire with fire. That doesn't work. More than being pro-choice or pro-life, we need to always remain pro-logic. When the tactics are wrong, misleading, and perhaps even vile, you take the higher road. Not the same.
Agreeing with Mr. Asimov here is one thing (I'm sure most of us do), but it's hypocritical to applaud him for using this kind of debate "tactic" while deriding and mocking religious fundies for doing the same thing.
"Now now, perfectly symmetrical violence never solves anything."
it's hypocritical to applaud him for using this kind of debate "tactic" while deriding and mocking religious fundies for doing the same thing. be a debate about the bodily integrity of humans?
People who are for forcing others to donate their body parts for the use of another are wrong, and I'm right. It's a simple fact.
If he was engaged in a debate in the source, then that's a poor response. And sometimes these vital moral concepts like bodily integrity do need to be examined and discussed. But I should be able to say "I have the right to have an abortion if I want to" without having to defend it, because I shouldn't need to provide reasons why my body's my own.
"If someone were arguing against a person who claimed that 2+2=5, I'd just tell them they're wrong and I'm correct."
The author of this fundi say the darnest article is from exchristian.net...I was in the middle of typing out my response when they banned me...LOL They are a bunch of weak people over there for they have to resort to banning me for I speak the truth. I want ASIMOV to wire this message back to the right owner of this message and to thank them for a good time well spent..
oh and guess who said this quote? LOL
Excuse me Sam I am.
I'm not ban..ha ha..I see everything you say..ha ha..Biatches....
Cousin Ted, who the heaven are you? And why are you not wearing your rediculous exchristian rob of yours? http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?showtopic=14276&hl=
May their exGod(s) punish these traitors..
Dear Ramen666,
"Yeah, but now he is posting all sort of weird crap on the fundies say the darndest things site. Take a look."
Um...he's kind of right. The anti-choicers are wrong. Just because he doesn't provide the reasoning behind his position doesn't mean he doesn't have any. In fact, what he's saying, evident from the first sentence, is that he wants to continue the discussion, and he doesn't want to let the anti-choicers in the thread get away with "agreeing to disagree" and refusing to listen to reason.
Wow. Seriously, Asimov, I know that pro-lifers are big on the unfounded assertion of self-righteousness, but we're better than that. We actually have coherent, logical arguments (crazy, I know). Start using them.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
