Subject:
|
Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 4 Oct 2002 18:27:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
895 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
>
> > It's akin to thinking that, "Aha! I caught you! I have 'knocked the legs
> > out from under you' by showing that your quotation comes from a different
> > source!" Well, no, you just demonstrated that I have faulty research, the
> > quotation is still standing out there, with it's "own legs", waiting to be
> > refuted.
>
> But if we're talking about gun control and you say "in 1780, Jefferson wrote x
> in a letter to the Virginia assembly about the meaning of militia" and it
> turns out that the quote was actually written by Sarah Brady in 1989, the
> quotation is not "still standing out there." It's sunk! Sarah Brady doesn't
> get an opinion (unless of course, we can show that she has taken care to
> research it and is presenting her findings).
That's a *fantastic* example, and it dovetails nicely with my point in an
earlier debate. Mike P is now off the hook for using the false Brady quote:
"Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who
would resist us are totally disarmed," since he's recognized it as false and
he no longer cites it. However, the quote is still a favorite thumping
point for anti-gun-control groups, and its falsehood seriously undermines
their position. It creates the impression of a weak argument, because once
the quote is revealed as false, it makes it seems as though the argument is
so weak that it must fabricate information to validate itself.
And in fairness, if we're discussing gun-related issues as they apply to
21st century society, I would say that Jefferson doesn't get an opinion,
other than as a statement of historical context and, perhaps, as a means to
understand original intent (though I'm still not convinced that that's even
really possible!).
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
|
| (...) Jeez, Dave!... I agree that we can revisit a given question. I agree that the historical meaning of the 2nd and 9th Amendments only get at the legislative intent and do not go to stare decisis or what we may do now or in the future (through (...) (22 years ago, 4-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
|
| (...) But if we're talking about gun control and you say "in 1780, Jefferson wrote x in a letter to the Virginia assembly about the meaning of militia" and it turns out that the quote was actually written by Sarah Brady in 1989, the quotation is not (...) (22 years ago, 4-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
