One can easily argue that from an evolutionary perspective nothing is more necessary than reproduction, so any suffering of the woman would not be unnecessary.

Then make that argument John. Pay special attention to demonstrating that all suffering that a woman may experience in the course of reproduction is necessary (especially by reference to the necessity of reproduction). You may also want to explain why suffering itself is necessary, rather than simply present.....and of course if you could please do all of this from "an evolutionary perspective" that would be greatly appreciated.

(November 13, 2012 at 1:26 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Implying that you have a compelling reason that a position is correct isn't quite the same as providing that compelling reason, now is it?

No. What's your point?

Quote: I didn't ask anyone to prove anything,

Er, technically true I suppose. You just asked for compelling reason that something's correct...

Quote:I'd just like to see those "compelling reasons"....

And again, if there were compelling reasons, it wouldn't be opinion.

(November 13, 2012 at 1:34 pm)John V Wrote: No. What's your point?

That you don't have one (either a compelling reason or a point..take your pick).

(November 13, 2012 at 1:37 pm)Rhythm Wrote: That you don't have one (either a compelling reason or a point..take your pick).

OK, I choose compelling reason, and respond - NSS, if I had compelling reason it wouldn't be subjective.

What wouldn't? The opinion or reason..lol? There's nothing about compelling reasons that precludes something from being subjective....I can give you compelling reasons for my subjective opinion with regards to vanilla -specifically how it's much better than chocolate- subjectively, of course.
(we're gonna hit the gas and move on the the next endlessly opined about subject now aren't we)

NSS?

(November 13, 2012 at 1:47 pm)Rhythm Wrote: What wouldn't? The opinion or reason..lol?

The opinion.

Quote:There's nothing about compelling reasons that precludes something from being subjective....I can give you compelling reasons for my subjective opinion with regards to vanilla -specifically how it's much better than chocolate- subjectively, of course.

No, you can give reasons. They won't be compelling.

Quote:NSS?

No Shit, Sherlock. A phrase/acronym I use frequently here as my interlocutors tend to be masters of the obvious.

Of course they will John. You see I don't like "heavy" tasting things, and chocalte, to me, tastes "heavier" than vanilla, and that's why I'm of the opinion that vanilla is much better than chocolate, subjectively.

What's not compelling about that?

(see how easy it is for me to elaborate on any old thing, btw? if you'll remember not so long ago you were asked to offer some elaboration - open ended no less- but chose to go the route of diversionary chit chat instead)

(November 13, 2012 at 2:09 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Of course they will John. You see I don't like "heavy" tasting things, and chocalte, to me, tastes "heavier" than vanilla, and that's why I'm of the opinion that vanilla is much better than chocolate, subjectively.

What's not compelling about that?

All of it, as I'm not compelled in the slightest to have some vanilla.

Quote:(see how easy it is for me to elaborate on any old thing, btw? if you'll remember not so long ago you were asked to offer some elaboration - open ended no less- but chose to go the route of diversionary chit chat instead)

I'm waiting for Lonestar, as I consider your entire participation to be diversionary. I guess that makes you Barf.

(November 13, 2012 at 2:16 pm)John V Wrote: All of it, as I'm not compelled in the slightest to have some vanilla.

I'm under no obligation to compel you to have vanilla John (nor should you have imagined that this was my intention), all I was doing was providing compelling reasons for my subjective opinion. If you didn't like heavy tasting things, and chocolate tasted heavy...would you like chocolate?

Now, you might say "but I do like heavy tasting things" Well, good for you, but since this is my subjective opinion (and wasn't I perfectly upfront about that?) how is that relevant? How does it erode the compelling nature of my own tastes and how they inform my own opinion- to me?

You might say "but chocolate isn't heavier than vanilla"...and again good for you, but it's more of the above. My subjective opinion is that it is, and because I hold this opinion, combined with the previous opinion, the reasons for my liking vanilla over chocolate cannot be anything but compelling. Still doesn't mean you have to agree. Which is why what began as a subjective opinion or point remains so, even though I can give compelling reasons for holding or having it.

All of this of course serves to highlight something I mentioned way-way back...in that I can elaborate upon my opinions in ways that your god cannot. I'm also upfront about the nature of my opinions in ways that you will not allow your god to be.