Being raped better than letting women have gun to shoot rapist with?:India and rape

[doulos]

Well calling other people martians, or writing stories about their death is a great exercise for those of us learning about why guns should not be handed over to everyone.


Well I hope you test what's leading you.

Matthew 5:22
But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.

You do realize that all you are demonstrating by letting your emotions dictate your response is that you are incapable of defending the position you hold. Using these tactics and using Scripture out of context against others is not helping to defend your position. As you are led friend, as you are led!

 

[ServantStrike]

Nope! Look at your four (4) best friends! I feel so much better!!! Wheeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!

-> 1 In 5 Americans With Mental Illness, National Survey - Medical News Today

Quit fanning the flames man.

I know you're just trying to rile people up, especially mentioning that masks off video, which you know was debated to death already.

1 in 5 americans have mental illness according to shrinks. You know, people who's entire living depends on finding mentally deficient patients to treat. Even that article you reference mentions that the number is 5 in 100 who suffer from serious mental illness. There's a disorder for everything, that crap doesn't count, we're talking about the danger to self or others kind of mental illness, and that number isn't 1 in 5.

11.4 million adults (5% of the adult population) suffered from a serious mental illness in the past year (one that leads to a serious functional impairment that substantially interferes or limits one or more major life activities).

How about everybody just take a step back, take a deep breath, and discuss this like adults.

 

[Rachel20]

Shortly after, the house broke up and the floodwaters swept Rachel20 away and she drowned.

Maybe we should make a video that says Praus is a marrtian. Wonder if he'd believe he was a martian! Sad, very sad!

Another baseless and false accusation. Funny how those who can't defend their positins result to such tactics. Like I said I'll keep you in my prayers!

Psalm 52:2
Your tongue plots destruction, like a sharp razor, you worker of deceit.

Galations 6:7-8
Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.



MASKS OFF

 

[Rachel20]

You do realize that all you are demonstrating by letting your emotions dictate your response is that you are incapable of defending the position you hold. Using these tactics and using Scripture out of context against others is not helping to defend your position. As you are led friend, as you are led!

Oh well. I just showed your position

I don't claim many tools of defence.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

No. I was responding to your false assertion about my academic experience. What YOU said was:

"Clearly you need to TAKE a critical thinking course..."

The truth is that I already have taken many such courses.

My reply to you was:

"I have taken quite a few classes in logic, critical thinking, research and statistics, etc... already. In fact, I have a bachelor's of science and two master's degrees each with an A average. You should have asked rather than make a false assertion based on your own wrong best thinking. That's what a wise person would do. Here's how it works: What are your academic credentials Rachel?"

It is not reasonable to expect every single person to present a resume as a prerequisite to engaging in every discussion on the Internet. It is reasonable to ask a question of someone's academic experience instead of making a false assertion regarding it.

Obviously, you lacked the wisdom to ask. The burden of proving that someone else lacks academic experience is on the one making the assertion that they don't have it.

I pointed out to you my own for both your benefit in the future in the hopes that it teaches you to ask questions rather than make false assertions about other people but also to refute any confusion caused by your false assertion regarding my academic experience.

As for your assertion that many of the world's famous thinkers and inventors are dropouts, the truth is that far more did not drop out. For those that did, in almost all modern cases, what they learned in the course of their academic pursuit put them in a place and/or brought them to a place where they dropped out to pursue an idea that academic pursuit spawned.

And yes, I've taken that course and also designed curriculum around some of the principles for the purpose of facilitating idea creation, invention, and innovation.

But you still haven't answered my question Rachel so I'll repeat it a second time. WHAT ARE YOUR ACADEMIC CREDENTIALS?

Do you think an academic degree is the only basis of a person's intelligence ?

Quite a lot of the world's famous thinkers and inventors are dropouts.

Well clearly, since you didn't mention your very amazing credentials, I would have never known. I am soooooo impressed.

I merely suggested taking up a course on this subject as well and I will ask again , Have you taken a course on lateral thinking?

 

[doulos]

Psalm 52:2
Your tongue plots destruction, like a sharp razor, you worker of deceit.

Galations 6:7-8
Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.



MASKS OFF

View attachment 70115

Oh well. I just showed your position

I don't claim many tools of defence.

Sad tactics very sad, I'll keep you in my prayers! As you are led friend, as you are led!

 

[Praus]

It is not reasonable to expect every single person to present a resume as a prerequisite to engaging in every discussion on the Internet. It is reasonable to ask a question of someone's academic experience instead of making a false assertion regarding it.

Obviously, you lacked the wisdom to ask. The burden of proving that someone else lacks academic experience is on the one making the assertion that they don't have it.

Ironically, appealing to Rachel20's credentials (her authority) is a an example of argumentum ab auctoritate fallacy.

I think someone with such high powered credentials from such superior schools would know that.

I wonder if one can get a refund from a university.

But you still haven't answered my question Rachel so I'll repeat it a second time. WHAT ARE YOUR ACADEMIC CREDENTIALS?

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I accept your apology for being bothersome. You stated that you trusted God for your protection in the context of a discussion in which you argued that people do not have the right to defend themselves, their loved ones, and innocents from violent sexual assailants up to and including lethal force.

The inference is that people who understand scripture legitimizes self-defense up to and including lethal force, as has been explained to you, are not trusting God for their protection.

That false inference needed to be refuted and it was.

That aside, how would you stop an armed assailant that intended to rape and murder you?

Though you haven't answered a single question I've put to you so far, I'd like to know.

I said this one line about my personal beliefs- The rest you have concocted about my asking people to be irresponsible. Interesting how offensive is just one line of putting faith and trust in God is. I am not sorry it bothers you. I will continue to trust God and give my life in his hands. I do not support the carrying of guns. There are other means for protection available to us now.

 

[Rachel20]

I accept your apology for being bothersome. You stated that you trusted God for your protection in the context of a discussion in which you argued that people do not have the right to defend themselves, their loved ones, and innocents from violent sexual assailants up to and including lethal force.

The inference is that people who understand scripture legitimizes self-defense up to and including lethal force, as has been explained to you, are not trusting God for their protection.

That false inference needed to be refuted and it was.

That aside, how would you stop an armed assailant that intended to rape and murder you?

Though you haven't answered a single question I've put to you so far, I'd like to know.

Firstly for someone who claims to have taken many courses, you are unable to really read what I said. No apologies for my post that I trust God, if it bothers you. Sorry

I am not sorry it bothers you. I will continue to trust God and give my life in his hands. I do not support the carrying of guns. There are other means for protection available to us now.

If you go back a few pages, you will see that I have answered someone else who tried to ask me something similar about dealing with someone who wrongs me. I do not say a woman should not defend herself. Or anyone for that matter.

Your inference skills are very poor.

I have not answered your question about my academic credentials because I think it is unnecessary and leads to argumentum ab auctoritate fallacy

I wonder if one can get a refund from a university.

Me too

 

[Praus]

I don't claim many tools of defence.

You want to buy a fire extinguisher, sister?

 

[ServantStrike]

Oh well. I just showed your position

I don't claim many tools of defence.

Rachel, he could have gone about discussing his position better, and in some states what he said would have been considered a threat, but you have to let it go.


There are some very honest people here talking about their personal experiences and why they decide to carry a defensive sidearm. Not all of them have assumed an argumentative tone with you.


Here's another reason I'm not sure you've considered. Some people carry one to defend others as well as themselves. You can trust in God all you would like, but it might be the person next to you who God has put it on their heart to be ever vigilant that delivers you in your time of need.


Just a thought.

 

[Loveneverfails]

I read the whole thread, and I regret it. Sometimes, you just can't change someone's point of view.

That said, in response to the OP, I find that mindset of opposing the gun to be quite sad. Everyone, male or female, should have the right to defend themselves. There are different methods of self-defense that are appropriate for different contexts. I believe we ought to pray for discernment in choosing the right form of self-defense for the situation.

As for me, I've got a black belt in karate, shooting knowledge and experience, but no concealed carry permit just yet. I keep forgetting to do that, but this thread just reminded me to get on that.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

You've made a false assertion based on your ignorance of what argumentum ab auctoritate (e.g. argument from authority) actually is Praus.

Stating that something is true solely because you have authority in that area would be an example. Stating that someone else is wrong solely because they do not have authority in that area would be another example.

I've done neither in this discussion.

What you also omitted is that when the authority involved is a relevant source (e.g. someone who has real competency in the area of discussion) and access to more information about the topic than the people discussing it, then the argument becomes a citation.

And asking someone for their academic credentials is useful in discovering areas of competency or lack therein as an authority. Informing someone what areas of competency can help them reason better also doesn't qualify as Argumentum ab auctoritate.

What you've done is shown that you don't understand what the fallacy is while engaging in a different fallacy that you directed against me: ad hominem.

If you don't understand something Praus, simply ask.

Ironically, appealing to Rachel20's credentials (her authority) is a an example of argumentum ab auctoritate fallacy.

 

[Rachel20]

You've made a false assertion based on your ignorance of what argumentum ab auctoritate (e.g. argument from authority) actually is Praus.

Stating that something is true solely because you have authority in that area would be an example. Stating that someone else is wrong solely because they do not have authority in that area would be another example.

I've done neither in this discussion.

Quoting your academic degrees to speak about lateral and critical thinking is not an example?

What you also omitted is that when the authority involved is a relevant source (e.g. someone who has real competency in the area of discussion) and access to more information about the topic than the people discussing it, then the argument becomes a citation.

We prefer to verify credentials of a person before considering them as valid citation.

And asking someone for their academic credentials is useful in discovering areas of competency or lack therein as an authority. Informing someone what areas of competency can help them reason better also doesn't qualify as Argumentum ab auctoritate.

What you've done is shown that you don't understand what the fallacy is while engaging in a different fallacy that you directed against me: ad hominem.

Informing someone else of their areas of competency on reasoning when one cannot clearly read would perhaps qualify as hypocrisy.

What you've done is shown us that people can say anything on the internet.

If you don't understand something Praus, simply ask.

Praus, I don't think you should ask him where he got his degree. They could sue you.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I never asked you for an apology. You offered one for being bothersome. I accepted that apology of yours which you offered. Inference is the act or process of deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true. My inference skills are fine.

The problem is that I didn't go back far enough in the thread and see where you stated that you don't condemn Christians for exercising their legitimate right to self-defense up to and including lethal force should it be necessary, etc...

Now I have. Unless you've changed your mind since the earlier posts and have begun to assert the opposite of that, there's no longer any reason to argue that point with you which is great because I have things to do tonight. .

Firstly for someone who claims to have taken many courses, you are unable to really read what I said. No apologies for my post that I trust God, if it bothers you. Sorry If you go back a few pages, you will see that I have answered someone else who tried to ask me something similar about dealing with someone who wrongs me. I do not say a woman should not defend herself. Or anyone for that matter. Your inference skills are very poor. I have not answered your question about my academic credentials because I think it is unnecessary and leads to argumentum ab auctoritate fallacy Me too

 

[Rachel20]

Oh Sadly I kind of overlooked this post. Let me respond as an act of goodwill.

No. I was responding to your false assertion about my academic experience. What YOU said was:

"Clearly you need to TAKE a critical thinking course..."

The truth is that I already have taken many such courses.

What I originally said was this.

Clearly you need to TAKE a critical thinking course or have taken one.

Good luck taking another course on Lateral thinking as well

I did ask if you have already taken such a course. Which you have. Sorry it was not very apparent.

 

[jimmydiggs]

 

[Rachel20]

I never asked you for an apology. You offered one for being bothersome. I accepted that apology of yours which you offered. Inference is the act or process of deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true. My inference skills are fine.

The problem is that I didn't go back far enough in the thread and see where you stated that you don't condemn Christians for exercising their legitimate right to self-defense up to and including lethal force should it be necessary, etc...

Now I have. Unless you've changed your mind since the earlier posts and have begun to assert the opposite of that, there's no longer any reason to argue that point with you which is great because I have things to do tonight. .

Nope. I did an offer any apology for my stance or my posts. Your inference skills might seem fine to you, but your reading skills are in question.

My personal convictions have not changed.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Well, anyways. Right or wrong, it's been stimulating. I'm off to work. God bless you all. You too Rachel and Praus. Peace.

 

[Rachel20]

Sigh... Mask's off.