Minuteman Leader murders 9 year old girl.

@OmSigDAVID,

Thanks for the laugh David.

No TRUE CONSERVATIVE (Scotsman) would possibly shoot anyone over drugs. There are right wing extremists. Simply declaring that no true conservative is a right wing extremist is nothing more than a logical fallacy.

2 Replies

@parados,

I think that David is claiming that the Minutemen who kill 9 year old girls are not TRUE CONSERVATIVES.

1 Reply

David - it is not as any of your examples suggest. Extreme conservatism is not having hands that are too clean or having an accountant who does too good of a job.

T
K
Othrodoxy IS an extreme position.

2 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Thanks for the laugh David.

No TRUE CONSERVATIVE (Scotsman) would possibly shoot anyone over drugs. There are right wing extremists.
Simply declaring that no true conservative is a right wing extremist is nothing more than a logical fallacy.

Will u explain your point,
by correcting my allegedly defective logic ?

Where did my reasoning go rong ?

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

but it is, conservatism is the norm, haven't you learned anything, the rest of are deviants, deviants i tell you, now get your grubby raincoat on and let's go flash children at the playground

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

I think that David is claiming that the Minutemen
who kill 9 year old girls are not TRUE CONSERVATIVES.

That 's right.
In order to prove that in so doing thay were true conservatives,
it woud have to be proven that the subject matter of the conservation
(the US Constitution) requires doing that.

I have read it once or twice; I did not find that in there.

David

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

David - it is not as any of your examples suggest. Extreme conservatism is not having hands that are too clean or having an accountant who does too good of a job.

T
K
Othrodoxy IS an extreme position.

By what reasoning
have u reached the conclusion that orthodoxy is an extreme position ?

David

1 Reply

@djjd62,

djjd62 wrote:

but it is, conservatism is the norm, haven't you learned anything, the rest of are deviants,
deviants i tell you, now get your grubby raincoat on and let's go flash children at the playground

I beg your pardon!
My raincoats are clean and devoid of grubs,
but u go on ahead without me.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

sorry to confuse, i was talking to tko, my post should have read "the rest of us are deviants"

1 Reply

@djjd62,

djjd62 wrote:

sorry to confuse, i was talking to tko,
my post should have read "the rest of us are deviants"

O, OK.

Well, let us know how that works out when u get back.

Please make sure that thay know that u r not conservatives.

`

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Those who deviate are liberal
and those who do not are orthodox or conservative.

Whether that is good or bad depends upon WHAT
is being either conserved or being deviated from.

Your definition of a conservative is a perfect example of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

You state no conservative would deviate from the norm so any conservative that does deviate becomes "not a true conservative."

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

David - it is not as any of your examples suggest. Extreme conservatism is not having hands that are too clean or having an accountant who does too good of a job.

T
K
Othrodoxy IS an extreme position.

By what reasoning
have u reached the conclusion that orthodoxy is an extreme position ?

David

Well, I think it is an extreme position as well; for it calls for a rigidity in the face of a changing world, when flexibility is far more appropriate. Orthodoxy leads to extreme positions as the previously held beliefs are left further and further behind by both science and society.

That's why the Amish, say, who eschew technology, are both orthodox and extreme at the same time.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

David - it is not as any of your examples suggest. Extreme conservatism is not having hands that are too clean or having an accountant who does too good of a job.

T
K
Othrodoxy IS an extreme position.

By what reasoning
have u reached the conclusion that orthodoxy is an extreme position ?

David

Well, I think it is an extreme position as well; for it calls for a rigidity in the face of a changing world, when flexibility is far more appropriate. Orthodoxy leads to extreme positions as the previously held beliefs are left further and further behind by both science and society.

That's why the Amish, say, who eschew technology, are both orthodox and extreme at the same time.

Cycloptichorn

Well put and a good example.

David - What you FAIL to understand is that the minuteman shooter would argue that they are defending the constitution by taking vigilante roles to secure the border yada yada.

This murderer was a conservative.
This murderer was very extreme.

Orthodoxy is extremism when the world changes. It is extreme in its stubborness and shortsightedness. It is doomed to fail because the world changes whether we choose for it to or not.

T
K
O

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:
Those who deviate are liberal
and those who do not are orthodox or conservative.

Whether that is good or bad depends upon WHAT
is being either conserved or being deviated from.

Your definition of a conservative is a perfect example of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

You state no conservative would deviate from the norm so
any conservative that does deviate becomes "not a true conservative."

YES; that is accurate, but it fails to disprove my position.
At the point in time that he deviates,
he BECOMES and transforms into an ex-conservative.

Let 's try it this way, for demonstrative purposes:
(I will use round numbers for ease)
A true supporter of the gold standard is one who believes that for each paper dollar issued,
there must be an ounce of gold in the treasury, redeemable in gold by a bearer of the paper $.
Joe Blow believes that there must be an ounce of gold in the treasury, redeemable in gold by a bearer of the paper $.
Joe Blow is a true supporter of the gold standard.

He then meets F. Roosevelt, who dissuades him from this belief.
At the point in time when Mr. Blow changes his mind,
he become an ex-supporter of the gold standard.

If u see any error in that logic, Mr. P,
I hope that u will point it out, if u don t mind.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

There is a very large error in your logic.

A conservative is a person that has certain beliefs.
A supporter of the gold standard has certain beliefs.

A person that no longer supports the gold standard no longer has the beliefs.

A person that commits a crime doesn't change his beliefs at all. He has only committed an act that may or may not be outside the beliefs he has. It doesn't mean he is no longer a conservative. You have stated an act that has nothing to do with the person's beliefs removes them from the group. The classic "NO TRUE SCOTSMAN" argument.

For instance... No true conservative would vary from traditional grammar and spelling. You vary from the tradition David.. therefore you are no true conservative. Your definition of what removes people from being a conservative is so broad that there would be no true conservative in the world.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

David - it is not as any of your examples suggest. Extreme conservatism is not having hands that are too clean or having an accountant who does too good of a job.

T
K
Othrodoxy IS an extreme position.

By what reasoning
have u reached the conclusion that orthodoxy is an extreme position ?

David

Well, I think it is an extreme position as well; for it calls for a rigidity in the face of a changing world, when flexibility is far more appropriate. Orthodoxy leads to extreme positions as the previously held beliefs are left further and further behind by both science and society.

That's why the Amish, say, who eschew technology, are both orthodox and extreme at the same time.

Cycloptichorn

Suppose that 2 men negotiate, enter into and agree upon a contract
whose terms grant rights and impose duties upon each of them.
Suppose that one of those men fully and perfectly performs his duties under that contract.
The other man 's performance is inconsistent with and deviates from the terms thereof.

He argues that the first fellow shoud not be orthodox,
that he shoud let him get away with the deviations from his contractual duties because last week
he had a fight with his cousin, he got a flat tire, his left foot stinks and he is a member of a minority group.
"So gimme what I want, n don 't bust balls, or else that proves that u hate my minority group."

A conservative judge will say: "No. A deal is a deal."

A liberal judge will say: "Mr. Plaintiff, don t be so technical.
That 's close enuf. Forget about it. He belongs to a minority. Have a heart; what 's rong with u?"

Cyclo, if u enter into any contract, and the other party
(who rightfully owes u cash, goods, or services according to that contract)
defaults, giving u only some part of what u deserve and demand
and he tells u that your contract "calls for a rigidity in the face of a changing world,
when flexibility is far more appropriate" u might feel gyped, swindled, and cheated by a liberal.
Definitionally, a conservative strictly and rigidly adheres to exactly what he is supposed to do.
If he fails to do that, then he is not a conservative as to that issue.

or to put it another way:
u wish him to deviate as little as possible from his rightful obligations to u

The more he deviates from them, the more liberal is his interpretation of your contract, the more he lies about it and cheats u.

3 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

The more he deviates from them, the more liberal is his interpretation of your contract, the more he lies about it and cheats u.

Now you are not making any sense at all David.

If someone deviates from a contract, it in no way means he lies about it or cheats you.

Contracts change all the time for various reasons. Construction contracts pretty much REQUIRE that they change. The construction has to meet code. If the contractor doesn't fulfill the contract because of circumstances outside the contract that doesn't make him a cheat or a liar. It means the contract is only valid within certain limits. As a lawyer you should understand that.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

david, I engaged in a contract with a tree trimmer, the contract called for him to trim two trees and have all the trimmings removed from my property by noon. I got home at 1 p.m. and there were still branches laying in my rear yard. due to his failure to comply with our contract I shot him in the head killing him instantly. I expect people to live up to their contracts in the same way you do APPARENTLY. Not only did he not fulfill our contract he was an illegal alien who was not licensed by the city of Albuquerque to trim trees.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

or to put it another way:
u wish him to deviate as little as possible from his rightful obligations to u

The more he deviates from them, the more liberal is his interpretation of your contract, the more he lies about it and cheats u.

David; neither you nor anyone else signs a contract with life. Liberalism isn't about violating some pre-existing arrangement; your example isn't really relevant to our actual experience. Minority groups have nothing to do with our discussion.

You state,

Quote:

Definitionally, a conservative strictly and rigidly adheres to exactly what he is supposed to do.

Who defines what you are supposed to do? Outside of the boundaries of written contracts, there are no definitions of what you are supposed to do. This is what leads to the extremeness of orthodoxy; the erroneous concept that you or anyone else has a real definition of things such as obligation, duty, or correctness, which does not change over time. All these definitions change over time.

Imagine that you and I sign a contract for me to redo your bathroom. Everything is going swimmingly until your house is hit by lightning and burned down. The contract we signed did not anticipate this eventuality and did not include any language dealing with the house burning down whatsoever. An orthodox position on your part would demand that I complete the renovation despite the changing circumstances, but I'm sure you can agree that this would be perfectly ridiculous.

This is the correct analogy for our modern life, for we simply cannot accurately foresee the future and the way our lives will change over time. Conservatism gives us basic rules and guidelines for figuring out how to deal with these changes, but strict adherence to the previous rules in the face of changing circumstances will lead to poor results every time; flexibility and the ability to create new rules under new circumstances will lead to strength over time.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@dyslexia,

dyslexia wrote:

david, I engaged in a contract with a tree trimmer, the contract called for him to trim two trees and have all the trimmings removed from my property by noon. I got home at 1 p.m. and there were still branches laying in my rear yard. due to his failure to comply with our contract I shot him in the head killing him instantly. I expect people to live up to their contracts in the same way you do APPARENTLY. Not only did he not fulfill our contract he was an illegal alien who was not licensed by the city of Albuquerque to trim trees.

Wow! That sounds like accurate marksmanship.
From what distance ?

I guess he probably shoud have stayed in Mexico (or worked faster).
( I 'm assuming he was not a Canadian. )

Good luck with getting your yard cleaned.

0 Replies

Minuteman Leader murders 9 year old girl.

Quick Links

My Account

able2know