home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!prism!emperor!rpitts
- From: rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Subject: Re: Poor Petesie
- Keywords: Nyikos failing other arguments goes for guilt by association
- Message-ID: <67896@hydra.gatech.EDU>
- Date: 9 Sep 92 19:08:28 GMT
- References: <1992Aug29.135948.22535@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> <nyikos.715465492@milo.math.scarolina.edu> <5763@catnip.berkeley.ca.us>
- Sender: news@prism.gatech.EDU
- Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology
- Lines: 38
-
- In article <5763@catnip.berkeley.ca.us> tanj@catnip.berkeley.ca.us (Ren and Stimpy's Love Child) writes:
- >In article <nyikos.715465492@milo.math.scarolina.edu> nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos) writes:
- >>I've seen real speculation from the pro-choice side. People
- >>calling me a misogynist, a liar [...]
- >
- >I call you a liar because you make accusations based on hearsay alone, and
- >you absolutely refuse to substantiate any of these. Then, with amazing
- >chutzpah, you repeat these unfounded accusations.
-
- A liar per a dictionary is would who tells lies -
- synonyms: deceiver, hypocrite.
-
- One who makes accusations based on hearsay alone does not qualify as a
- liar. The one who does it may not be able to substantiate their claims,
- but that does not make the claims none the less true or the person a liar.
- On a public system like this, it is not wise to make hearsay claims, but
- again this doesn't mean the claims are false.
-
- I suppose no one else on this net repeats anything without hard proof or
- investigation, huh? :-)
-
- >I'm happy for you to prove me wrong by coming up with evidence for your
- >diatribes.
-
- Prove him wrong and then let him respond - but don't call him a liar without
- first proving him wrong and proving he intentially deceived.
-
- >--Teddi
-
- Sincerely,
- Richard Pitts
-
-
- --
- rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu |
- Atlanta, GA --|--
- -|- | -|-
- | | |
-