Marrying a hologram

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Then you are arguing that your previous 'argument' was wrong.

Since you seemed to have mangled that argument.I find myself wondering if there is any point continuing.
You seem to be equating logic, such as you understand it with morality.
I think that you have previously dismissed that and are here confecting a moral argument using logic....and thats about all I can salvage from your current efforts.

[Nearly Sane]

Since you seemed to have mangled that argument.I find myself wondering if there is any point continuing.
You seem to be equating logic, such as you understand it with morality.
I think that you have previously dismissed that and are here confecting a moral argument using logic....and thats about all I can salvage from your current efforts.

irrelevant drivel, ignoring that you have put forward a self contradictory position on this thread.

[Aruntraveller]

Since you seemed to have mangled that argument.I find myself wondering if there is any point continuing.
You seem to be equating logic, such as you understand it with morality.
I think that you have previously dismissed that and are here confecting a moral argument using logic....and thats about all I can salvage from your current efforts.

So not being content with having your cake and eating it, you are now in the process of shitting it out all over this message board.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

irrelevant drivel, ignoring that you have put forward a self contradictory position on this thread.

Feel free to outline the argument you think is contradictory so we can check it against the original.
You seem to be confusing a could we argument with a should we......and there is no mention of redefinition here.

I think you got that wrong and seem to be handwaving here to attract attention away from that

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So not being content with having your cake and eating it, you are now in the process of shitting it out all over this message board.

What does this all mean?

[Aruntraveller]

What does this all mean?

I thought it was a damned sight clearer than anything you have posted this far.

[Nearly Sane]

Feel free to outline the argument you think is contradictory so we can check it against the original.
You seem to be confusing a could we argument with a should we......and there is no mention of redefinition here.

I think you got that wrong and seem to be handwaving here to attract attention away from that

I already did outline it. You just ignored that to post irrelevant drivel. If you think taking a position that allows something means you have to allow everything or in some way be hypocritical, then that applies to you. When presented with that you then argued for a contradictory position.

I can't see any point in continuing this discussion further, as you seem uninterested in logical consistency.