RE: Mitt Romney Gargles Nutsacks
January 14, 2012 at 11:13 pm
(This post was last modified: January 14, 2012 at 11:14 pm by Perhaps.)
Notice, this whole conversation could have been avoided had you not made the statement:
A question or a counter remark acts as a medium through which an objective conversation can take place. Simply adding emotion to the discussion does retard the progress - we had to discuss the semantics of it and there were emotional ramifications.
Someone can possess character - but then who's to say which character is good or pure or moral? Logic is objective, why pollute it with subjectivity?
If you disagree then simply state why, using logic and reason. No need to get emotional about it. Thus is my original argument as it pertains to politics.
Quote:Don't be fucking stupid.
A question or a counter remark acts as a medium through which an objective conversation can take place. Simply adding emotion to the discussion does retard the progress - we had to discuss the semantics of it and there were emotional ramifications.
Someone can possess character - but then who's to say which character is good or pure or moral? Logic is objective, why pollute it with subjectivity?
If you disagree then simply state why, using logic and reason. No need to get emotional about it. Thus is my original argument as it pertains to politics.
Brevity is the soul of wit.
