Thanks for the reply, jda.
I certainly appreciate your answers. If it were the case that you weren’t dealing with rage-filled, rabid (fill in the blank) in the debate, I would encourage you to go for it. As it is, however, I know that they aren’t interested in your logic. They are not interested in your reasoning ... which is great, by the way.
History has proven that if you give them today ... some scary looking thing ... they will be back for another scary looking thing tomorrow. Debating, they plead for “common sense measures” and since you are the only one trying to hang onto something and they have nothing to lose, you are automatically going to lose something each time you go to the table.
“Want to debate gun rights?”
“NO.”
I liked your answers, but I’m sticking with mine. ;-)
Best Regards,
SC
Part of our side's problem is that they have bought into the leftists' mantra that all things are negotiable. Therefore, the left thinks they can propose anything preposterous and then frame the argument that our side is somehow expected to compromise - to agree to some something not quite so preposterous.
Gun control, sequestration, budgets and taxes are just a few examples. We don't do a very good job of shaping the discussion by stating (and then sticking to our guns) that some things just aren't debatable. But, at the same time, I think we should educate those who will listen (recognizing the 50% who support 0bama may not be educatable) as to why certain things aren't open to compromise and why the left's hysteria is not based on rational thought or facts.