People who don't know how to have a decent debate

Yes, i know i'm ranting a lot.

There is this person on vine making piss poor agruement. She directly goes to bashing/insult more then one time (you won't see that in the convo because i have it blocked and few post are blocked out).

I'm saying Abortion isn't murder under law because it's legal but personal preferences can mean murder.

Here is the convo.

Me- you or i opinoin isn't superior to law. We are all govern by laws. what you believe doesn't mean it's right. Laws have no morals. Only people. There is no morality to say your morals are superior to mine or others. Also when you resort to namecalling/bashing people you lose all credibility (person said i have no morals because i believe what hitler done was right when i never stated anything about hitler doing right. I was saying what he done was simply legal switch i said it doesn't mean it was right of him to do that. It just means it was legal in his country at the time).

Her-If something is wrong its always wrong. Laws mean nothing. Our opinoin are not superior to law? So what. [locked post]. Hitler was ok. Killing you would be legal but not right. if i tortured someone you loved legally would be mad. Even if it was legal you....

Me- morality is subjective and differs. Laws mean everything. it a fact and it governs everyone.

Her-would be mad. even if it was legal. Did i call you a name? you called me a troll (switch i did not). Not bashing if you only think things are bad or good because of laws then you don't have morals. thats a fact. who are you to say name calling or bashing is wrong? its legal so its ok.

Me-no one said what he done was right. What he done was simply legal. If i believe murder is killing a tree but you don't. We have separate morality. Law comes in and states the facts. I didn't call you a troll. I was talking about jazz (he was saying he should control women uterus and stuff and troll like material). saying i have no morals is bashing. Read my post. laws have nothing to do with morals. If i believe in law makes good and bad. That's a personal belief. Not a fact. like i said before morality is subjective and differs.

Her-law states the facts. All countries have different laws. so if i step in Canada the facts are different somehow? you are the one who said abortion is ok because its legal. so, your opinoin of right and wrong depends the law. So, you dont have morals. who are you to say bashing is bad?

Me- correct laws are different country to country but it doesn't change anything.

Her- you said abortion is ok because it's legal (i said "abortion is legal so therefore it's not murder). according to your logic, what hitler did was ok and bashing and name calling is ok. (I mention dozen of times namecalling/bashing loses all credibility) but you just said laws are facts!

me-read my post again. I never stated abortion is ok because it's legal. I even stated it can be murder on personal prefrences. May i ask how old you are?

her- you said "abortion is legal so therefore it isn't murder" what do you think that means?

me- means it's legal under law. nothing on me thinking its ok.

her-therefore its NOT MURDER thats saying abortion is ok.

me- now you're wasting my time. read my post

her-i quoted your post word for word. Apparently you don't understand what words you are saying mean.

me- again bashing=no credibility law=murder=illegal killing abortion=legal=not murder also read underneath that post and you see where i said it can be murder but only through personal prefrences.

her- murder is murder. it doesn't matter what you think.

me-its like our whole convo went over your head. no one needs a dictionary. You're simply misunderstanding my post or you're not reading them properly.

her- a dictionary badly.

me- bashing= no credibility

her- look up what you said in the dictionary. bashing=legal=ok

me-what word do you think i need to understand that i said? what you're telling me has nothing to do with a word. more like a sentence.

her-there are words in the sentence, lol

me-if it was murder under law then a woman would be charged with the crime but the law doesn't. Switch means it's not murder under law. You don't need a dictionary to know this.

her-it may not be murder under law but that does not mean its not murder.

me-read my post again. it can be murder what people personal preferences belief. if you believe its murder then its murder through your eyes. but if i belief it's not then its not.

her- if it murder its murder whether you think it is or not

me- thats a personal preference.

her-whether its murder or not is a fact

me- personal opinoin on murder=/=superior.

her- if thats true, anyone could kill someone and its ok because its their personal prefrences. you are saying there is no right and wrong

me- then law isn't supporting your claim because it isn't murder under law. law=fact personal=subjective

her-no opinoin is superior? then someone could kill you and you cant say its wrong. law=fact then what hitler did was ok!!!

me- this is going to be my last round

her-if law=fact then you think what hitler did was ok and the fact are somehow different depending on where you live.

me=law=governs everyone. personal preferences=subjective

her- you are on hitler side then. in china it is illegal to have more then one child but legal here. how are both facts?

me-basically saying i'm leaving the agruement.

her- she went on the blintz saying i couldn't be mature and back out and all that stuff.

I dislike people like this. I seen people better agrue then this girl. Just needed that off my chest.I may not reply to you. Just wanted this off my chest.

a reply to: CaptainHook

I mean this constructively: If you care about what you say, take care in how you say it. If you won't use proper English ...

a reply to: Snarl
i know i don't have the best grammar out there.

I didn't read all of your post, but I get the gist.

Right/wrong is a personal opinion.
Legal/illegal is a matter of fact.

Trying to argue the two can be frustrating. I'm usually the one talking about what's "legal and illegal", and others come in with the emotional and subjective "right and wrong". They're two different things.

Many think abortion is "wrong", but as you have stated, it's legal. That doesn't mean it's right, though, because that is a matter for each person to decide for themselves.

I get VERY frustrated with people who go after me personally, but I think it's because they feel they're losing the debate and must resort to a different subject.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I agree that abortion is murder of a human child.

But, I also like bacon so I am a hypocrite when it comes to killing other creatures for food.

Thus, I will disqualify myself from the above debate.

a reply to: CaptainHook

My uncles hot button was and always has been immigration, and the ills of letting in so many illegals into the country and not stopping and or extraditing them. He had every stat memorized, every fact, etc. at a moments notice for a debate. He dealt in facts and they always debated from an emotional standpoint. Once we were on a job together and it started as it usually does, and as he losing the debate because he lacks the knowledge the guy says to my uncle you are just an Ahole. My uncle serious as ever looks at him and says ok so I am an Ahole now prove I am wrong. Calm as ever.

It worked with no position to move to the guy gave up and walked away. When they can't attack the science or the position, they attack you. Take that away and mums the word.

Just remember two things ..
1. Marquis of Queensbury rules at all times....
2. ten minute break between rounds to have a beer ..

a reply to: Metallicus

Forgive me but I have read this post a couple of times. I guess if you ATE the former you could equate them with bacon. (Please no flamers - just an observation) Otherwise the reason for the demise of the two differs.

I would not call you a hypocrite for your stance on both.

originally posted by: ABNARTY
a reply to: Metallicus

Forgive me but I have read this post a couple of times. I guess if you ATE the former you could equate them with bacon. (Please no flamers - just an observation) Otherwise the reason for the demise of the two differs.

I would not call you a hypocrite for your stance on both.

Good point and thank GOD we aren't eating the former.

I stand corrected, sir.

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: ABNARTY
a reply to: Metallicus

Forgive me but I have read this post a couple of times. I guess if you ATE the former you could equate them with bacon. (Please no flamers - just an observation) Otherwise the reason for the demise of the two differs.

I would not call you a hypocrite for your stance on both.

Good point and thank GOD we aren't eating the former.

I stand corrected, sir.

Actually you still would not a been a hypocrite. wanna know why? Because its meant to mean THOU SHALL NOT MURDER. If we coudnt kill wed a been dead a long time ago.

I'll leave my personal opinion out and stick to the topic

I am not terribly good at debate myself so I'll pick on myself as well

My issues stem from lack of confidence or knowledge in a subject and the fear of the court of public opinion. Sometimes I aim to get into a debate before I am well versed on both the pro AND con side and it's lead to my demise plenty of times

I also fear responses from others. It's not because I want people to agree with me, I just don't want to look stupid...and boy have I

Now for others...the biggest problem I see on ATS AND the internet period is belligerence. People have this idea that if they attack the person or get all huffed up it means they are good at debate. No it makes you look like an idiot...and I should know...I'm an idiot

I love when people are all "you don't want to debate me"

which translates to "I will throw out one fact and call you names afterwards and not attack facts...fear me"