Pokebball Posted September 26 Posted September 26 45 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: nah, that comes in the evening. been out chipping, putting and hitting bunker shots....all I can do til they fix my back. Cannabis is legal in Va. Just harvested my 4 permitted plants. They did very well. I didn't initiate the banned book discussion but I won it! for further context, did Comey perjure himself?
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 26 Author Posted September 26 6 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: Since I want through it it is the opposite of a straw man you illiterate moron. Saying strawman when I went through it is the most disingenuous response possible. I have not read the handmaids tales but it has a very sexual nature with sexual scenes. I ask again why do you want to discuss sex with a middle schooler so much? You keep acting like no one wants to discuss sex with an 11 year old but you get upset when we make it illegal. You’re an idiot. I really pray you’re not really a teacher. 5 minutes ago, Pokebball said: for further context, did Comey perjure himself? Context of the subject “truth”? We’ll see how the court case goes. I don’t know what the evidence is. The video of him responding to Cruz isn’t in itself convincing. It remains to be proven whether what he said was true.
BillsFanNC Posted September 26 Posted September 26 You guys should definitely stay on the merry go round of perpetual projection with Quack! 1
Tenhigh Posted September 26 Posted September 26 (edited) 58 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: nah, that comes in the evening. been out chipping, putting and hitting bunker shots....all I can do til they fix my back. Cannabis is legal in Va. Just harvested my 4 permitted plants. They did very well. I didn't initiate the banned book discussion but I won it! The pot plant explains a LOT, including why you think you won any argument on here. But if you are you looking for truth winning is the opposite of your goal. I do appreciate you realizing the flaws in how you communicate. I just wish you were able to fix it. Edited September 26 by Tenhigh 1 2
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 26 Posted September 26 7 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: You’re an idiot. I really pray you’re not really a teacher. The definition of a straw man argument: A straw man argument is a logical fallacy where someone misrepresents or distorts an opponent's argument into an exaggerated, weaker, or false version of itself, and then argues against that distorted version instead of the original one I pointed out a real incident, not false or distorted, so actually knowing the definition of words makes me "an idiot". If you had called it anecdotal you would have been close but exactly correct but your statement is indefensible so you resort to name calling. Truly you are so easily duped I feel bad for you 1 1 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 26 Author Posted September 26 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: The definition of a straw man argument: A straw man argument is a logical fallacy where someone misrepresents or distorts an opponent's argument into an exaggerated, weaker, or false version of itself, and then argues against that distorted version instead of the original one I pointed out a real incident, not false or distorted, so actually knowing the definition of words makes me "an idiot". If you had called it anecdotal you would have been close but exactly correct but your statement is indefensible so you resort to name calling. Truly you are so easily duped I feel bad for you you argued using the premise of me supporting porn or sexually explicit books for children. I don't and I never said I did. But you "went through it". Wtf does that mean and how does it relate to your straw man argument against something I never said? 29 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: The pot plant explains a LOT, including why you think you won any argument on here. But if you are you looking for truth winning is the opposite of your goal. I do appreciate you realizing the flaws in how you communicate. I just wish you were able to fix it. Huh? Winning an argument and looking for the truth are mutually exclusive? splain... certainly, one can argue an untruthful point. Lawyers do it all the time. But I did not. I communicate just fine. Never had a colleague complain. Edited September 26 by Joe Ferguson forever
Tenhigh Posted September 26 Posted September 26 6 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: Huh? Winning an argument and looking for the truth are mutually exclusive? splain... certainly, one can argue an untruthful point. Lawyers do it all the time. But I did not. I communicate just fine. Never had a colleague complain. If you were really interested in truth you'd actually understand that learning is what is important over winning. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 26 Author Posted September 26 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: If you were really interested in truth you'd actually understand that learning is what is important over winning. They're both important. Do you cheer for the Bills to win or learn? Just for Orlando. Maybe you could just watch the movie. The Handmaid's Tale author, Margaret Atwood, published an article in The Atlanticin 2023, responding to the school board in Madison County, Virginia banning her book from high-school libraries on the grounds of having explicit sexual scenes. She argued that the official reasons for the ban are ridiculous, stating that her book "is much less sexually explicit than the Bible." Limiting what kids can read based on religious views is also a form of totalitarianism and flies against the separation of church and state that the US is founded on. The author stated that despite her book being misunderstood as anti-Christian, The Handmaid's Tale was partially inspired by biblical texts and argues "against totalitarian control and power hoarding cloaked in a supposed religiousness that is mostly based on the earlier scriptures in the Bible." Atwood does have a point. It makes little sense that her book is banned, while movie and TV adaptations that include more explicit scenes are not. Banning her book from libraries only affects those who can't afford to buy books. Atwood also raised the topic of book censorship in the age of social media and streaming platforms. The Handmaid's Tale depicts a dystopian society where the theocratic Christian authoritarian regime of Gilead has taken over the US. The penultimate fifth season of The Handmaid's Tale delves further into June's story. The provocative nature of the subjects discussed in the story may cause discomfort for certain people, especially on the subject of sex, birth control, and women's rights. However, contrary to what is claimed in the official statement on the book ban, sex exists only by mention. There's no direct, on-the-page description of explicit activities. AlthoughThe Handmaid's Tale was written for adults, the book often makes an appearance on high school reading lists. The author has since teamed up with Penguin Random House to create a fire-proofed version to ensure her book cannot be burned. Edited September 26 by Joe Ferguson forever
Tenhigh Posted September 26 Posted September 26 1 minute ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: They're both important. Do you cheer for the Bills to win or learn? That's silly, and intentionally obtuse. 1 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 26 Author Posted September 26 3 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: That's silly, and intentionally obtuse. Which do you find unimportant, winning or learning?
Wolfgang Posted September 26 Posted September 26 10 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: Which do you find unimportant, winning or learning?
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 26 Posted September 26 2 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: you argued using the premise of me supporting porn or sexually explicit books for children. I don't and I never said I did. But you "went through it". Wtf does that mean and how does it relate to your straw man argument against something I never said? You are arguing against the law that restricts adults having sexual discussions with children, what other conclusion could be reached? Since this is not a new law to argue almost anything else is just admitting you are proud of your ignorance of a 3 year old law. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 26 Author Posted September 26 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: You are arguing against the law that restricts adults having sexual discussions with children, what other conclusion could be reached? Since this is not a new law to argue almost anything else is just admitting you are proud of your ignorance of a 3 year old law. The other conclusion is the correct one: That I'm arguing that books that are not sexually explicit, especially those that have a political or religious stance outside of conservative arbitrary red lines, are forbidden. So what about your straw man that attempted to validate by going thru it. Lord, I hope you're not a teacher. Edited September 26 by Joe Ferguson forever
JDHillFan Posted September 26 Posted September 26 2 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: They're both important. Do you cheer for the Bills to win or learn? Just for Orlando. Maybe you could just watch the movie. The Handmaid's Tale author, Margaret Atwood, published an article in The Atlanticin 2023, responding to the school board in Madison County, Virginia banning her book from high-school libraries on the grounds of having explicit sexual scenes. She argued that the official reasons for the ban are ridiculous, stating that her book "is much less sexually explicit than the Bible." Limiting what kids can read based on religious views is also a form of totalitarianism and flies against the separation of church and state that the US is founded on. The author stated that despite her book being misunderstood as anti-Christian, The Handmaid's Tale was partially inspired by biblical texts and argues "against totalitarian control and power hoarding cloaked in a supposed religiousness that is mostly based on the earlier scriptures in the Bible." Atwood does have a point. It makes little sense that her book is banned, while movie and TV adaptations that include more explicit scenes are not. Banning her book from libraries only affects those who can't afford to buy books. Atwood also raised the topic of book censorship in the age of social media and streaming platforms. The Handmaid's Tale depicts a dystopian society where the theocratic Christian authoritarian regime of Gilead has taken over the US. The penultimate fifth season of The Handmaid's Tale delves further into June's story. The provocative nature of the subjects discussed in the story may cause discomfort for certain people, especially on the subject of sex, birth control, and women's rights. However, contrary to what is claimed in the official statement on the book ban, sex exists only by mention. There's no direct, on-the-page description of explicit activities. AlthoughThe Handmaid's Tale was written for adults, the book often makes an appearance on high school reading lists. The author has since teamed up with Penguin Random House to create a fire-proofed version to ensure her book cannot be burned. Does your med regimen need to be revisited? You are certainly starting to repeat the behavior that led to your breakdown. Hang in there. 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 26 Posted September 26 2 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: The other conclusion is the correct one: That I'm arguing that books that are not sexually explicit, especially those that have a political or religious stance outside of conservative arbitrary red lines, are forbidden. So what about your straw man that attempted to validate by going thru it. Lord, I hope you're not a teacher. So you think elementary schoolers should be discussing the killing fields? Or how about brokeback mountain? Your lack of knowledge of the actual situation is pathetic. I will ask what book that has been rejected is a bad rejection? 1 1 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 27 Author Posted September 27 1 hour ago, Orlando Buffalo said: So you think elementary schoolers should be discussing the killing fields? Or how about brokeback mountain? Your lack of knowledge of the actual situation is pathetic. I will ask what book that has been rejected is a bad rejection? Who said anything about the killing fields or brokeback mountain? You posted the definition of straw man but didn’t comprehend it. I’m not sure I understand your awkward prose either. But here’s a list of banned classics. Steinbeck and Huxley stand out. https://www.rawstory.com/florida-banned-books-2666728303/
JDHillFan Posted September 27 Posted September 27 4 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: Who said anything about the killing fields or brokeback mountain? You posted the definition of straw man but didn’t comprehend it. I’m not sure I understand your awkward prose either. But here’s a list of banned classics. Steinbeck and Huxley stand out. https://www.rawstory.com/florida-banned-books-2666728303/ Learn something from your intellectual superior, and mine, Neo: 21 hours ago, Neo said: Too delicious … the “book banning” accusation in a thread addressing truth, reasoning and logic. Ethos (Credibility) Labeling conservatives “book banners” equates ordinary parents and school boards with regimes that outlaw entire ideas. In reality, these citizens are participating in the long-standing democratic practice of selecting age-appropriate material for publicly funded schools. This is stewardship, not censorship. Pathos (Emotion) The phrase “book banning” summons images of locked libraries and government purges. That framing is emotionally powerful but misleading. The books in question remain available in public libraries, online, and in stores. Conservatives appeal to a different emotion—protectiveness—arguing for developmental suitability, not for erasing ideas from society. Logos (Reasoning and False Equivalency) Removing a book from a school library is not banning a book. A ban prohibits all access under penalty of law; a removal is a curation decision about one venue. Public schools must choose what they stock, and communities have a right to set standards for minors. Equating selection with censorship is a classic false equivalency—it mistakes a limited, age-based decision for universal suppression. Conclusion (Avoiding Sophistry) Using “book banning” as a blanket label substitutes rhetorical force for accurate reasoning—what Aristotle (and Plato before him) would call sophistry. It obscures the genuine question of how schools choose materials suited to children. By separating emotion from logic, we see the accusation collapses under scrutiny. The real debate should focus on age-appropriate education, not caricatures of censorship.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 27 Author Posted September 27 (edited) 4 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Learn something from your intellectual superior, and mine, Neo: Asked and answered. He didn’t rebut. In fact, he agreed with me. But should he, I’ll assume he’s speaking for you given your above claim. Edited September 27 by Joe Ferguson forever
JDHillFan Posted September 27 Posted September 27 1 minute ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: Asked and answered. He didn’t rebut. Why did you quote 4merperformer and pretend it was 4th&long? More importantly, why would you come to the rescue of a complete dipsh*t like 4th? You really threw up on yourself, didn’t you? 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 27 Author Posted September 27 3 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Why did you quote 4merperformer and pretend it was 4th&long? More importantly, why would you come to the rescue of a complete dipsh*t like 4th? You really threw up on yourself, didn’t you? I posted 4merperformer to illustrate that an Epstein post predated the claim of another poster. why did you move on from my short debate with Neo? 1
Recommended Posts