Your response isn't very consistent, I'm afraid. You seem to be trying to use one biased argument to argue against, what you claim to be another biased argument. Sorta like smacking your little sister while telling her to quit hitting you.
f Incorrect. I did not answer the question in the first sentence. Note the use of quotation marks around "responsible".
I asked a question, I didn't suggest a solution. You people seem to read things that just aren't there.
Not sure what thread you are referring to, however, there are no questions in the OP to this thread. Loaded or otherwise.
And my position is I love to play golf, but what does that have to do with anything? You had assumed that the OP was advocating something he clearly was not. This extreme supposition is a symptom of black/white thinking (not to be confused with critical thinking).
Actually, technically they are not "loaded questions". The first question is a straightforward question that presupposes nothing, therefor the answer may be given without confirming any presupposition. The second question could be called "rhetorical" or even "flippant", but hardly a "loaded question".
You are certainly no authority to teach anyone else about the definition of a "loaded question," since you have still failed to comprehend the meaning of this simple term. Also, YOUR definition of "loaded question" appears to change depending on whether or not the OP agrees with your ideology.
No, I'm wanting to know what your solution is? With freedom and rights, there is only one way or the other...you can't have grey area with rights.
What is the point of this thread? Uncle Meat is doing as he usually does, makes simple one line statements without substance. Starts a thread, implying that the act of one person is somehow indicative of the group. Trolling?
Sigh...... I have tried to enlighten you as to this particular fallacy, but I recall you having a difficult time with this concept. I have even given you reading materials in another post. I suggest you peruse them. Of course I can't blame you for your angst, given that you are still smarting from being called out on your constructing a whole thread on this fallacy.
Of COURSE there's "grey areas" with Rights. That's precisely why we have our Supreme Court, friend. To interpret our Constitution which enumerates our Rights. Just look at our First Amendment Right and all of the grey areas that have been found in it when applied. I'm afraid you are sadly mistaken.
I've done no such thing: I asked a few questions; I've suggested no answers. Why must you jump to conclusions so quickly?
Why must your posts be anything but an argument? Either argue an issue or move on. No reason to even post the thread if you are afraid to engage in a discussion.
LOL! Your delusional state knows no bounds. The OP's question was OBVIOUSLY, by definition, a loaded question. There's no getting around that. I do recall "perusing" the reading materials, but it might be best if YOU first read and comprehend those materials before passing them on to me (since you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to "loaded questions").
Based, I take it on your vast knowledge of this particular fallacy? ......... Interesting. Did you? Honestly? I think not. Look, you had denied (and still deny) that YOUR question in YOUR OP was a loaded question where you asked: "Do you condemn the shady strategy of lying and deception that is so common in all of the major anti-gun organizations?" and you have the nerve to now accuse this OP of using a loaded question here? REALLY? Sorry, but your authority to make such judgments is highly suspect.
Yes, I do have a vast knowledge of this issue because you keep on beating this dead horse of an issue, forcing me to do research to find MANY sources that prove your argument wrong a million times over. Despite using these many sources to buttress my [correct] interpretation of the term "loaded question", you still continue to deny the obvious and fail to let a dead issue rest in peace. I think so. Your deception knows no bounds. If you look at the question IN CONTEXT, the only way this can possibly be construed as a loaded question is if it was directed towards the leadership of the aforementioned anti-gun organizations. However, I wasn't asking this question to the leadership of these anti-gun campaigns. I wasn't even asking this question even to ordinary members of these anti-gun programs. Rather, I was asking this question to members of this FORUM. Hence, while the question was clearly direct, it is certainly not a "loaded question" by any accepted definiton of that term.
