Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Australian Federal, State and Local Politics
Forum rules
Don't poop in these threads. This isn't Europe, okay? There are rules here!
User avatar
boxy
Posts: 6748
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 11:59 pm

Re: Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Post by boxy » Fri Jan 07, 2011 6:02 pm

Sappho wrote:
Ethnic wrote:
freediver wrote:Can you argue logically with a woman?
Is that what you do when your argument starts to crumble? You make dopey insults?
Actually, I've been watching this sexist attitude which sees men think themselves superior... it is common and ingrained.
Of course... people who have actually been watching the discussion will know that freediver's quote is a direct, and sarcastic reply, to the "you can't debate logically with a hunter" remark.

Both are stupid remarks, only one was stupid on purpose.

But don't let me get in the way of your self-righteous indignation.
"But you will run your fluffy bunny mouth at me. And I will take it, to play poker."

Sappho

Re: Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Post by Sappho » Fri Jan 07, 2011 6:53 pm

boxy wrote:Both are stupid remarks, only one was stupid on purpose.

But don't let me get in the way of your self-righteous indignation.
In context... 'Why not?' was the only relevant thing said in that comment. No point inferring a whole gender as illogical so as to highlight the excessive and emotive over generalisation from one woman who is frustrated at not having her thoughts been given full and fair consideration.

Too quickly and too often do those who seek sarcasm resort to gender bashing. What's more... it's almost an auto pilot response, suggesting an underlying belief. I'm a bit tired of it.

User avatar
freediver
Posts: 3487
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 10:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Post by freediver » Fri Jan 07, 2011 7:28 pm

The ban on whaling and whale products is in place because the majority of Australians don't support whaling.
I agree. It has nothing to do with sustainability or ethics. Which is why the government is in such a quandry.
If big business thought there was a market for whale meat, Gerry Harvey would be annoying the government about it.
I guess this is why you aren't running a business.
There is no campaign because the majority don't want whale products.
There is a campaign. I have first hand experience of it.
The free market in Japan states that whale meat is in low demand. They are overkilling because of taxpayer funding. Surely you'd be against that.
I think it is a wise strategic move given the inevitability of the resumption of commercial whaling.

Mantra:
That was an obvious error on my part - it should have read 'whales are a finite resource'.
But they keep breeding. We can keep taking from the population indefinitely.
That was an obvious error on my part
Your whole argument is an obvious mistake.
I was referring to WWII - I wasn't specific enough for you.
So how is that relevant to whether whaling should be allowed? Are there any other foods that you like that you would be happy if they were only legal if you were starving?
If we were producing enough to adequately meet our needs - we wouldn't need to import from third world nations.
We are a net food exporter.
the foreign owned farms certainly won't be putting us first on the list for a feed
If we are starving it won't matter what they think.
At present allowing the Japanese to encroach within our boundaries
The antarctic waters in which they hunt are not within our boundaries.
so why shouldn't we exercise protectionism here also
I am fine with that, so long as it only extends to our actual territory.
Funny how most of your posts indicate your support for whaling.
I will put this one down to another 'obvious mistake' on your part.

Sappho:
so as to highlight the excessive and emotive over generalisation from one woman who is frustrated at not having her thoughts been given full and fair consideration.


Just because they are shown to be wrong does not mean they weren't given fair consideration.
Too quickly and too often do those who seek sarcasm resort to gender bashing.
I wasn't aware of any other groups mantra belonged to which I could use.
What's more... it's almost an auto pilot response, suggesting an underlying belief. I'm a bit tired of it.
Perhaps because you seek it out so seriously.

Sappho

Re: Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Post by Sappho » Fri Jan 07, 2011 7:37 pm

freediver wrote:
Too quickly and too often do those who seek sarcasm resort to gender bashing.
I wasn't aware of any other groups mantra belonged to which I could use.
I have no idea what you mean.
What's more... it's almost an auto pilot response, suggesting an underlying belief. I'm a bit tired of it.
Perhaps because you seek it out so seriously.
No... I've only just started taking it seriously and responding to it. Previously, I just ignored it... but there comes a point when it becomes so common a retort, as it has become, that it is no longer humour... just insults against a gender for being that gender... gender bashing.
Last edited by Sappho on Fri Jan 07, 2011 8:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
freediver
Posts: 3487
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 10:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Post by freediver » Fri Jan 07, 2011 7:58 pm

I have no idea what you mean.
That's right. You missed the point completely.

Sappho

Re: Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Post by Sappho » Fri Jan 07, 2011 7:59 pm

freediver wrote:
I have no idea what you mean.
That's right. You missed the point completely.
Yes! And gloating about that is not an attractive quality. Why not try explaining what you mean.

User avatar
freediver
Posts: 3487
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 10:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Post by freediver » Fri Jan 07, 2011 8:04 pm

See boxy's post.

Sappho

Re: Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Post by Sappho » Fri Jan 07, 2011 8:10 pm

freediver wrote:See boxy's post.
boxy wrote:Of course... people who have actually been watching the discussion will know that freediver's quote is a direct, and sarcastic reply, to the "you can't debate logically with a hunter" remark.

Both are stupid remarks, only one was stupid on purpose.

But don't let me get in the way of your self-righteous indignation.
freediver wrote:
Sappho wrote:Too quickly and too often do those who seek sarcasm resort to gender bashing.
I wasn't aware of any other groups mantra belonged to which I could use.
I still don't understand your reply to my sentence.

Outlaw Yogi

Re: Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Post by Outlaw Yogi » Fri Jan 07, 2011 8:33 pm

mantra wrote:
You can't debate logically with a hunter .
Why not?
Are you worried a hunter might eat you?
I've been hunting for over 30 years .. trapping since 8 and shooting since 10 .. and I am under the impression that I am able to debate/argue as logically (or as irrationally for fun) as the next person. Actually my perception is that growing up with politics has given me the ability to out debate/argue more logically than most mugslies and dingbats who care to take me on.

According to my bigotry, it is animal rights veg nazis who are unable to debate or even think logically, because they allow their emotional extremism to dominate their intellect.

Ethnic

Re: Liebors duplicity exposed on whaling

Post by Ethnic » Fri Jan 07, 2011 9:07 pm

freediver wrote:I guess this is why you aren't running a business.
I am but thanks for yet another ignorant remark.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests