Lefties of Board... Still Feeling Biden Is a Good Idea?

[Chuz Life]

. . look who he is running against, having the moral high ground is a breeze for Biden.

<----- insert memes and videos of Biden's support for the denial of children's rights and lives by abortion HERE.

you can define child however you wish, but that does not make it universal. mine does not appear to include a fertilized egg:
Definition of child
a young person especially between infancy and puberty

Provide the link.

Let's examine the parts and other definitions that you have omitted.

Did you really think your cherry picking would go un-noticed or unchallenged?

I gave you MY definition, I never said it was the only definition. Another belief I have that you might not agree with is that abortion is NOT the only measure of a person's morality. Pro-choice people can be quite moral while pro-life people can be very immoral when you view them holistically. IMHO.

Since you like words and definitions. . .

This

One

Is

Fitting. . .


Definition of equivocation
: deliberate evasiveness in wording : the use of ambiguous or equivocal language

I'm compunctious, usually I eschew obfuscation.

Ok. So?

You were not accused of obfuscating.

 

[alang1216]

. . look who he is running against, having the moral high ground is a breeze for Biden.

<----- insert memes and videos of Biden's support for the denial of children's rights and lives by abortion HERE.

you can define child however you wish, but that does not make it universal. mine does not appear to include a fertilized egg:
Definition of child
a young person especially between infancy and puberty

Provide the link.

Let's examine the parts and other definitions that you have omitted.

Did you really think your cherry picking would go un-noticed or unchallenged?

I gave you MY definition, I never said it was the only definition. Another belief I have that you might not agree with is that abortion is NOT the only measure of a person's morality. Pro-choice people can be quite moral while pro-life people can be very immoral when you view them holistically. IMHO.

Since you like words and definitions. . .

This

One

Is

Fitting. . .


Definition of equivocation
: deliberate evasiveness in wording : the use of ambiguous or equivocal language

I'm compunctious, usually I eschew obfuscation.

Ok. So?

You were not accused of obfuscating.

my definition of a child "does not appear to include a fertilized egg:
Definition of child
a young person especially between infancy and puberty"

Doesn't sound evasive or equivocal to me? I'm sorry you have a problem with viewing morality as more than a single metric but that is your issue, not mine.

 

[Chuz Life]

. . look who he is running against, having the moral high ground is a breeze for Biden.

<----- insert memes and videos of Biden's support for the denial of children's rights and lives by abortion HERE.

you can define child however you wish, but that does not make it universal. mine does not appear to include a fertilized egg:
Definition of child
a young person especially between infancy and puberty

Provide the link.

Let's examine the parts and other definitions that you have omitted.

Did you really think your cherry picking would go un-noticed or unchallenged?

I gave you MY definition, I never said it was the only definition. Another belief I have that you might not agree with is that abortion is NOT the only measure of a person's morality. Pro-choice people can be quite moral while pro-life people can be very immoral when you view them holistically. IMHO.

Since you like words and definitions. . .

This

One

Is

Fitting. . .


Definition of equivocation
: deliberate evasiveness in wording : the use of ambiguous or equivocal language

I'm compunctious, usually I eschew obfuscation.

Ok. So?

You were not accused of obfuscating.

my definition of a child "does not appear to include a fertilized egg:
Definition of child
a young person especially between infancy and puberty"

Doesn't sound evasive or equivocal to me? I'm sorry you have a problem with viewing morality as more than a single metric but that is your issue, not mine.

When you are confronted with the way you are cherry picking your definitions and OMITTING the definitions that do NOT conform to your professed take on the moral aspects. . . . and you attempt to conceal or justify that action with sidebar bullshit comments about "some pro-lifers are bad and some pro-aborts are good people."

You are BY DEFINITION "equivocating."

 

[lennypartiv]

Both? Who is both?

Joey and Donny

Trump sexually assaulted someone? Link please.

 

[alang1216]

. . look who he is running against, having the moral high ground is a breeze for Biden.

<----- insert memes and videos of Biden's support for the denial of children's rights and lives by abortion HERE.

you can define child however you wish, but that does not make it universal. mine does not appear to include a fertilized egg:
Definition of child
a young person especially between infancy and puberty

Provide the link.

Let's examine the parts and other definitions that you have omitted.

Did you really think your cherry picking would go un-noticed or unchallenged?

I gave you MY definition, I never said it was the only definition. Another belief I have that you might not agree with is that abortion is NOT the only measure of a person's morality. Pro-choice people can be quite moral while pro-life people can be very immoral when you view them holistically. IMHO.

Since you like words and definitions. . .

This

One

Is

Fitting. . .


Definition of equivocation
: deliberate evasiveness in wording : the use of ambiguous or equivocal language

I'm compunctious, usually I eschew obfuscation.

Ok. So?

You were not accused of obfuscating.

my definition of a child "does not appear to include a fertilized egg:
Definition of child
a young person especially between infancy and puberty"

Doesn't sound evasive or equivocal to me? I'm sorry you have a problem with viewing morality as more than a single metric but that is your issue, not mine.

When you are confronted with the way you are cherry picking your definitions and OMITTING the definitions that do NOT conform to your professed take on the moral aspects. . . . and you attempt to conceal or justify that action with sidebar bullshit comments about "some pro-lifers are bad and some pro-aborts are good people."

You are BY DEFINITION "equivocating."

I've had some stupid arguments before but this one is a gem. You can define 'child' however you wish and so can I. I was crystal clear in what I meant.
End of discussion.

 

[Chuz Life]

. . look who he is running against, having the moral high ground is a breeze for Biden.

<----- insert memes and videos of Biden's support for the denial of children's rights and lives by abortion HERE.

you can define child however you wish, but that does not make it universal. mine does not appear to include a fertilized egg:
Definition of child
a young person especially between infancy and puberty

Provide the link.

Let's examine the parts and other definitions that you have omitted.

Did you really think your cherry picking would go un-noticed or unchallenged?

I gave you MY definition, I never said it was the only definition. Another belief I have that you might not agree with is that abortion is NOT the only measure of a person's morality. Pro-choice people can be quite moral while pro-life people can be very immoral when you view them holistically. IMHO.

Since you like words and definitions. . .

This

One

Is

Fitting. . .


Definition of equivocation
: deliberate evasiveness in wording : the use of ambiguous or equivocal language

I'm compunctious, usually I eschew obfuscation.

Ok. So?

You were not accused of obfuscating.

my definition of a child "does not appear to include a fertilized egg:
Definition of child
a young person especially between infancy and puberty"

Doesn't sound evasive or equivocal to me? I'm sorry you have a problem with viewing morality as more than a single metric but that is your issue, not mine.

When you are confronted with the way you are cherry picking your definitions and OMITTING the definitions that do NOT conform to your professed take on the moral aspects. . . . and you attempt to conceal or justify that action with sidebar bullshit comments about "some pro-lifers are bad and some pro-aborts are good people."

You are BY DEFINITION "equivocating."

I've had some stupid arguments before but this one is a gem. You can define 'child' however you wish and so can I. I was crystal clear in what I meant.
End of discussion.

What else can we all just define by ourselves or cherry pick definitions on?

Marriage?

RACE?
ANY fucking thing goes?

Why do we even have fucking dictionaries if that is an acceptable way to use them?

You are right, this has been a gem.

Most ignorant position you have taken yet.