I think you erred first by dismissing @papa-pepper's salient points in favor of post modern rhetoric.
But I didn't read every word past your first comment. I suggest figuring out a way to make more suscinct comments and author your own Response Post if the discussion is worth such lengthy comments.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
In other words, you aren't open to points that require more than a few lines of effort to convey?
Papa's writing is a recipe for codependency in relationships and bad marriages. If you have to be told to sacrifice, something is already wrong.
Yours is not an adequate rebuttal.
In other words, you aren't open to points that require more than a few lines of effort to convey?
"post modern rhetoric"
If you'd read any further, you'd have seen my whole argument was based on a list of facts you'll find near impossible to refute. But, it's easier to just dismiss it as rhetoric without actually responding to the arguments, isn't it?
Papa's writing is a recipe for codependency in relationships and bad marriages. If you have to be told to sacrifice, something is already wrong.
Yours is not an adequate rebuttal.
I see you still havent written a post about it.
So it is irrefutably clear that you don't care to make an argument that can be analyzed and examined. You just want to waste peoples' time as they read a rediculously long comment. Plus another overly long comment. Then another. And then you can say arrogantly stupid stuff like: WE BOTH KNOW MY ARGUMENT IS ROCK SOLID AND IRREFUTABLE. But you win...you have gotten me to respond to your idiocy. So you win. Pat yourself on the back and have yourself a beer. Or bourbon. Or Diet coke. And have a great weekend.
Your head must be nearly exploding with the cognitive dissonance you're holding in.
"So it is irrefutably clear that you don't care to make an argument that can be analyzed and examined. "
Yeah, if only I had written an argument somewhere. Maybe one that included a bunch of facts that can't be refuted (since they are public record in the court system).
"read a rediculously long comment."
Gee, do you think maybe a long comment could contain "an argument that can be analyzed and examined"?
"I see you still havent written a post about it."
What are you, my editor? I don't take orders from you.
Care to respond to male/female sentencing? Care to respond to alimony? Care to respond to female draft immunity? Care to respond to even one of my concrete, citeable, so-obvious-it's-stipulated-to-by-anyone-in-the-field facts?
Even if my comments weren't providing copious evidence you completely ignored, this would still be you:
"Argument from silence (argumentum ex silentio) – a fallacy where the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence."
+1% for having a great weekend. You too.