Stile writes:
Rebecca obviously took offense to the statement; therefore, he was wrong. Maybe it was a mistake, an accident... maybe he was trying to get a rise... it doesn't matter, it's wrong simply because it wasn't appreciated by Rebecca.
Huntard writes:
Wait...What? Since when is the fact that the receiving party is offended by something the sending party said any indication of whether or not the sending party is wrong. Are you wrong when Christians get offended if you tell them you do not believe in god? Really?
Well, if we take what the guy said at face value, he wanted to spend some time in a more intimate setting with Rebecca. The way he communicated that desire put her ill-at-ease. Under these circumstances, he's not going to get what he wants. Therefore, he used the wrong approach.
If Christians get offended at me when I tell them something about their religion under circumstances where I'm trying to engage them in a conversation, I'm more than likely not going to achieve my goal and thus am approaching them in the wrong way.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung
™ Version 4.2
