Gallup's Mirror

So that brings me to another question. Is islamaphobia real? Or do you perhaps feel this is in fact a term made up by apologists in order to allow Muslims “play the victim”.

“So, [Ayaan Hirsi Ali] was going to speak at Brandeis [University], but she called Islam the new fascism, so they said she could not speak. And they said she is Isl…[Read more]

…something that’s literally not nude is.

Yeah.

Sometimes I say it out loud two or three times, just to make myself feel crazy.

Strega wrote:@bellerose hey! We don’t all use you! Well, we use your posts to cheer ourselves up because they’re great :). Let it go, honey.

+1

Strega is right, Belle. I appreciate who you are and I enjoy your posts. A lot of us do.

Rage quit. Nice.

Don’t let the screen door smack you in the ass on your way out, Bob.

umar wrote:It is not my field. @gallupsmirror may try to explain.

It is lawful to link to copyrighted materials but not to infringing materials. By law, links to infringing materials technically must be removed upon discovery of the site manager or upon notice from the copyright holder. Usually it’s the originating site (not the site with links…[Read more]

I know the [poisoning the well] fallacy well enough to understand…

You really don’t. Poisoning the well is a preemptive ad hominem. My criticism was neither.

…that you’re basically criticizing the provider of the chart rather than the chart itself. I guess that’s a combination of an ad hominem and poisoning the well.

Ad hominem is fal…[Read more]

It’s worse than that, Stutz. [Gallup is] conflating murder in general with all deaths (including suicides, defensive shootings, and accidents) using a specific type of device.

I am saying ‘murder in general’ includes gun murders, and the study specifies that gun murders are included as a gun related death. I have stressed and restated this at l…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:You have no answer for the chart other than to poison the well.

I’ve already answered. You don’t know what poisoning the well means. It is not logically fallacious to point out a conflict of interest. Gun rights activism is not epidemiology.

Yes, Gallup, but you have no answer!!! Say it again, Unseen. I double dare you.

Belle: It does matter. You cannot make a sweeping generalization on this issue. The problem (and the solutions) are not uniform cookie cutter that can be the same in all places. A more regional approach makes sense in tackling this issue AND in understanding it.

Unseen: You don’t understand what this thread is about, then. I’m REFUTING the swe…

[Read more]

Gallup: …you started fantasizing that our respective positions are reversed; paraphrasing with dishonest euphemisms that my point has failed (“GM’s last stand!”) despite your own failure to rebut it.
Unseen: Yada yada yade.

Willful ignorance. You can’t rebut, so you must avoid…

Bush on the deck of the aircraft carrier.

…and lie.

So GM’s last stand would be a poisoning of the well.

Pointing out a conflict of interest is neither a logical fallacy nor a poisoning of the well. The political dogma surrounding gun rights is just as stupid as any religious dogma.

I knew you were out of ammunition when I saw how short your post was. LOL

Face it, Unseen. You got your brains b…[Read more]

That conclusion [published in a clinical research study in the American Journal of Medicine] flies in the face of the studies I showed.

You did not produce a study. You referred to data on two Wikipedia pages, one showing homicide rates by country and the other showing gun ownership rates by country. The analysis and explanation of what they mean…[Read more]

Have you ever known a person who believes ‘just in case’ I think its called the Religious Insurance Policy. They don’t believe because they want to they believe because they want to play it safe.

I’ve never known anyone like that. Religious Insurance Policy is Pascal’s wager by another name. It doesn’t work. The problem is that a sincere belie…[Read more]

Where I think it would be more effective is to concisely and clearly define hate speech because this is where things are ambiguous depending on who you ask….I think a definition more clearly stated within the guidelines would be appropriate regardless of who says it.

Your point about ambiguities is well taken, as there is neither a universal d…[Read more]

Welcome, Fouad.

If you don’t mind the question: what would happen if you were discovered as an atheist and apostate?