Jerseyshore
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Posts
- 1,391
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
To save people a click...
"Throw up" is about right.
Bramblethorn...
You realize you are employing a fairly common logical fallacy in your critique of this particular video clip -?
What was the actual specific point she was putting out there, in the video, and what was your actual directly point-focused rebuttal of it?
Watching the video, it seemed to me that she was largely saying pedophiles are disregarding the rights and views and perspectives of children. And your rebuttal of that... ...is?
That's not what she was saying. She was making a political point -- that the left, in league with secularism, atheism, the LGBT agenda, and post-modernism, endorses pedophilia. And that's nonsense. She doesn't support that point at all in her video. She quotes loosely and irresponsibly from various commentators who suggest treating pedophilia as a disorder, and she suggests without evidence that these people, therefore, don't want acts of pedophilia treated as crimes. But there's no evidence given for that. It's just nonsense.
If you scan the videos on her Youtube page you can tell she's a nutjob. I wasn't able to find links to the other information about her that Bramblethorn referred to.
Bramblethorn...
You realize you are employing a fairly common logical fallacy in your critique of this particular video clip -?
What was the actual specific point she was putting out there, in the video, and what was your actual directly point-focused rebuttal of it?
Watching the video, it seemed to me that she was largely saying pedophiles are disregarding the rights and views and perspectives of children. And your rebuttal of that... ...is?
Gah, Brambles: you're so hot when you talk like this
But I'm also familiar with Brandolini's principle:
"The energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude greater than that required to produce it".
Grifters understand this and they love it. When they insist on "rational debate", what they actually mean is: "I'm going to spend one minute telling a lie, and then I'm going to exploit the fact that you care about truth by holding you to a standard that requires you to spend an hour rebutting it according to the norms of debate. By the time you've done that, I'll have fifty-nine new lies out there."
If you try to respond to such people with point-by-point rebuttals, you are a mug. If you expect a rebuttal to change their position on anything, you are doubly a mug, because they do not care what the truth is. And by playing along with their pretense that this is a genuine "rational debate", you're giving these grifters an undeserved semblance of legitimacy which they can use to impress the gullible.
I've been thinking about this statement about grifters ever since you made it.
I
... get the words just the way I wanted them.
If I did that every time somebody demanded it, I'd burn myself out and I'd never get anything else done. So sometimes I have to remind people - starting with myself - that I'm not obliged to perform debate for everybody who requests it, and especially not for people who think they can demand it from me.
So sometimes I have to remind people - starting with myself - that I'm not obliged to perform debate for everybody who requests it, and especially not for people who think they can demand it from me.