Eske, Star Breaker wrote:
Looks like you lost your train of thought. I'll refresh you:
Alma wrote:
Eske wrote:
Alma wrote:
...forcing people to accept homosexuality and that's all there is to it.
Insomuch as the civil rights laws "forced" people to accept blacks, sure. You keep using that word, as if it's a strike against us. Yes, this is about accepting homosexuality. Your point?
Wow, could have sworn we already discussed that there is a difference between discriminating against physical traits and personality traits. Oh I see, it changes to always support your claim...
Ok...
This is what I was responding to.
To refute me, you need to prove why homosexuality isn't a personal quality, like being black is, in order to support your initial claim. You pulled a neat little semantic trick here:
I compare "personal trait to personal trait". The lynchpin of my argument is that they are both inherent qualities.
You change it to "physical trait to personality trait". I assume (perhaps wrongly) that you are referring to my earlier usage of the term "personal quality".
Your next logical step is trying to argue the differences between physical traits and personality traits, which are easy to point out. Subtle differences in wording, but you're doing it to try to change my argument into something that you can strike down. Unfortunately, it's not the same thing. That's your semantic game. It's also a strawman argument. And the whole diversion doesn't do anything to refute my point, which hinged on the fact that they are both inherent.
This is the kind of sh*t that you consistently do, and this is why you're so obnoxious to debate with.
EDIT: I'm out again. I can't be bothered to simultaneously try to keep you from changing my arguments, get you to confront my major points, keep you on topic, dissect your fallacies, and try to get you to realize them. You're not interested in having a real discussion, you're interested in maintaining your shell of delusion. I knew that from the get, but I thought that perhaps your ignorance had a limit.
It sadly does not.
Edited, Sep 18th 2010 3:58pm by Eske I know exactly what you were referencing to.
You're reading waaaaay too much into this and you're just confusing yourself.
I have no intention to refute your statement that homosexuality is a personal trait because either way, it doesn't change my point.
I honestly was not trying to change your words, I told you in my last post that I thought you were referring to personality traits when you said personal traits. Apparently, you were not, so I simply asked you to define exactly what you meant by personal trait so we know exactly the definitions we are using as opposed to assumptions.
THAT IS IT, NOTHING MORE NOTHING LESS.
I wasn't trying to change your argument.
You gave me your definition of Personal trait, which I didn't disagree with, I simply asked you another question. I said, based off your definition of personal trait, wouldn't that make a person's size a personal trait as well? So, I would like to know that answer.
You also said that homosexuality was inherent, so I asked you if you believed that people are born with feelings and emotions to things that they don't know exist without the capability of their feelings and emotions changing? I would like to know that answer as well.
I don't see how you thought this was off topic in the least bit sense.
