http://trueslant.com/conorfriedersdorf/2010/01/02/torture-slippery-slopes-and-debating-the-subject/ [Please go to 'Settings' to change your Tagline] Fri, 27 Jan 2012 20:55:22 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://trueslant.com/conorfriedersdorf/2010/01/02/torture-slippery-slopes-and-debating-the-subject/comment-page-1/#comment-254 Cheery Topics For The First Sunday Of The New Decade « Around The Sphere Sun, 03 Jan 2010 18:24:28 +0000 http://trueslant.com/conorfriedersdorf/?p=300#comment-254 [...] but somehow we’ve reached a far worse point in the debate where torture is deemed acceptable absent any imminent threat, or else opposing torture is deemed tantamount to pacifism, despite the obvious and [...] [...] but somehow we’ve reached a far worse point in the debate where torture is deemed acceptable absent any imminent threat, or else opposing torture is deemed tantamount to pacifism, despite the obvious and [...]

]]> http://trueslant.com/conorfriedersdorf/2010/01/02/torture-slippery-slopes-and-debating-the-subject/comment-page-1/#comment-253 obushidoo Sat, 02 Jan 2010 20:07:37 +0000 http://trueslant.com/conorfriedersdorf/?p=300#comment-253 The problem is Andrew isn't engaging in debate he is telling people the way it is and is calling them goostepping Khmer Rouge torture mongers if they dissagree. He gives no ground and is massivly hyperbolic and condesending. He considers long term meals of bad tasting albeit nutritious food to be as bad as ripping someones figernails off. The way he puts it if you are willing to do either you are an immoral monster like Hitler. His kind of debate does nothing except harden people's defences, it is a very common concept in public speach theory. The fact is Instapundit is right if the Andrews of the world had been more persuasive and less self rightious then they may have made a difference, and Andrew is right Intapundit should have been and could be one of the people who could make that better argument. The problem is Andrew isn’t engaging in debate he is telling people the way it is and is calling them goostepping Khmer Rouge torture mongers if they dissagree. He gives no ground and is massivly hyperbolic and condesending. He considers long term meals of bad tasting albeit nutritious food to be as bad as ripping someones figernails off. The way he puts it if you are willing to do either you are an immoral monster like Hitler. His kind of debate does nothing except harden people’s defences, it is a very common concept in public speach theory. The fact is Instapundit is right if the Andrews of the world had been more persuasive and less self rightious then they may have made a difference, and Andrew is right Intapundit should have been and could be one of the people who could make that better argument.

]]>