RE: Russia embraces religious intolerance with draconian blasphemy and anti-gay laws
July 16, 2013 at 3:55 pm
(July 15, 2013 at 5:55 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: The problem was not that they didn't find my arguments convincing. The problem is they deleted my posts and banned me from posting again.
Probably because they didn’t find your arguments convincing and they were therefore bad arguments, I see now why you like making appeals to popularity, they’re kind of fun!
Quote: Leaving an argument stand for all to read and not even consider it worthy of reply is a sign you find the argument weak.
No, that’s called allowing an argument to stand un-refuted, and is a good way to lose the debate, as you seem to like to do. Bad arguments are easy to refute, sound arguments are impossible to refute which is why you ignore them and pretend they are “not worthy of reply”.
Quote: Censoring an argument and deleting it so others don't see it is a sign you find the argument too strong to challenge and censorship is your only recourse.
They could just play a card from your deck and simply say the argument was so bad it was not worthy of being allowed to remain on their board. You’d have no grounds to object since you play that card all the time when you’re beat.
Quote:Evidently, your brothers and sisters in Christ that do run their own forums don't share that confidence for whatever reason.
Perhaps, or they hold their posters to a higher standard of respect and personal conduct that you do not measure up to. I do not know why you were banned and I am a bit skeptical that it was because your arguments were just too awesome; after all I am quite familiar with your arguments.
(July 15, 2013 at 6:03 pm)Chuck Wrote: Evidently even wordorf's brothers and sisters in christ isn't quite as foolish as he, and knows when to overturn the card table rather than attempt to double down with chips that exists only in his mind.
You mean “aren’t quite as foolish”?
(July 15, 2013 at 6:22 pm)Ryantology Wrote: You've done nothing to prove it is objective, and since yours is the assertion which defies both logic and common sense...
There’s nothing about moral objectivism that defies logic. An appeal to common sense is logically fallacious. If you’re going to accuse someone of “defying logic” you should first ensure that all of your logical ducks are in a row so to speak.