Re: Us government's trick to violate civil liberties
I am utterly rapt in fascination at the sheer audacity of this discussion. almightywood has literally defined every disagreement with his personal belief as an affront onto himself. This is must be the catholic defense in the debate world. To illustrate how I am interpreting this, let's go back to the easter bunny.
Person A believes the Easter Bunny exists. Person B does not and states that there is no evidence for the Easter Bunny and asks Person A to provide some. Person A says I cannot rule any idea out because it may be true.
End conclusion: Person B just made a personal attack on Person A and should feel ashamed with himself.
Did I get that one correct? I can just imagine how debates must go using this protocol:
Person A: I believe the current economic situation is sustainable and no change is necessary.
Person B: I disagree, and here's why (lays out counter argument.)
Person A: TAKE THAT BACK, YOU SULLY MY GOOD NAME WITH YOUR ATTACKS ON MY BELIEFS!
It's amazing to me that, unlike in the real world, people on the internet will wear "everyone thinks I'm a moron" as a badge of honour.