Answering a Liberal Loose Cannon

As you can see from the following, individuals who lack coherent, thought-out arguments are easily demolished.

Subj: S------'s Various Comments
Date: 95-06-30 07:34:48 EDT
From: BasFawlty

S------: BasFawlty It seems that the Christian right wants America to be a Christian nation without the real underpinnings of Jesus message. Love others as I have loved you. Feed the sick, visit the lonely etc. etc. We either have a Christian nation or a secular nation. If Christian what does that really mean? Is it only rhetoric from the right?

BasFawlty: It seems the so-called "Christian Left" wants America to exercise what they define as Christian giving (although it is not this, as L--------- pointed out to you, because it is compulsory) without being bound by any Christian morals or standards. You seem to want it to be a "Christian nation" where you want to use tax dollars for social purposes, but not a "Christian nation" where it would be in agreement with the "right" whom you so despise. Why the selectivity?

S------: L--------- Unfortunately your message came across as saying that money is more important than people. Where in the Bible did you discover this important new information for Christianity?

BasFawlty: I directly challenge that. I submit that you have completely (& willfully?) misunderstood L- here. Here is part of what he actually said:

L-: Picking the pockets of American citizens via the IRS and redistributing the money from those who work hard for it to those who won't is NOT charity! Nor is it the Biblical model for Christian charity described in the Bible.

Bas: Do you get it yet, S------? Compulsion does not equal Christianity. If you think it does, maybe you need to go join the Spanish Inquisition! ;) As I said last time, the verse "Render it ALL unto Caesar and trust him to sort it out!" does not appear in the Bible. And where can you find Jesus advocating governmental force as an engine for social giving? Is the glaring chasm between the Bible's voluntary giving and your government's compulsion of it such a hard concept for you to understand?

S------: All you guys out on the right fringe. Don't be part of the poor slob dittoheads blindly staggering down a road without compassion for others or an understanding of the part scripture should play in all our beliefs and activities.

BasFawlty: Seems to me that the ones "blindly staggering down a road" are your "poor slob LIB-o-heads" who can't seem to admit that their selective application of Christian ethics is as outmoded as last year's almanac. Nice rhetoric, though. Kind of takes the pressure off you to produce any scripture to back yourself up, doesn't it?

S------: My goal was to get you into a histrionic outburst so I WON! Anytime facists get cornered by the truth they resort to irrational namecalling as demonstrated in your post. When you have no valid facts follow the lead of
your glorious leader Rush and shout! Some people believe that increased volume will convince others when truth is missing.

BasFawlty: Hmmm--I thought your "goal" was to get to the truth. My mistake.

(BTW--nice use of exclamation points and capitals ["WON!"]. Generally speaking, that translates into "increased volume" and "shout[ing]," but I guess that's only when a conservative does it. When a liberal does the same, it only counts as "increased righteousness," right?)

Maybe next time we see you, you'll have some substance for us rather than the same old (stale) rhetoric.

© by T.L. Hubeart Jr.

·         Go to the Next Example

·         Back to the "Online Debating" Tips

Return Home