Pro-Obamacare picture circulating on Facebook

[ItsTime]

Ok someone make an anti-Obamacare one.

 

[onlyrp]

because its common sense, and the demagogue is the only one who takes your path.
taking someone else property because you need it for your life is not self-defense. that is the socialist/communist argument. the orwellian double speak that has led us to the government we have today.
that is why its so hard. war is peace, friendship and trade is isolationist. etc.

basically you're saying there's a difference between being shot to death and being starved or left ill to die?
Or else aren't we both preventing death? Is death only a problem when a person intentionally wants to kill? Or are accidents and death by preventable omissions worth preventing?
When I asked you about self defense you call me at troll, then you say what I was talking about, self defense.

 

[torchbearer]

basically you're saying there's a difference between being shot to death and being starved or left ill to die?
Or else aren't we both preventing death? Is death only a problem when a person intentionally wants to kill? Or are accidents and death by preventable omissions worth preventing?
When I asked you about self defense you call me at troll, then you say what I was talking about, self defense.

putting a gun to someone's face is an initiation of violence, starving to death is the result of someone's failure to take care of oneself.
if you care about those starving it your responisbility to voluntarily help them. it is moral for you to help by your choice. it is immoral to go to your neighbors house and point a gun at the face and demand they help or they die.
get it? or are we stuck at retarded?

 

[Occam's Banana]

Its difficult to have a constructive debate with logic against emotion. You have to appeal to the emotion in order for people to begin to understand the end logic. They are trying to win people by using emotion which unfortunately works immediately than does logic. This is why a lot of libertarians have a hard time getting emotional types, whether they are conservative or progressive or somewhere in between to understand.

QFT. I would say, though, that It's not merely "difficult" to have a constructive debate with logic against emotion. It's impossible.

Fortunately, people are not 100% emotional & 0% logical.

Some people place waaaay over on the emotional side of the spectrum, though, and these people are lost causes. Once you've identified these types, don't waste your time on them (unless you have an audience who might be swayed).

For others who have a large emotional component to their adoption of beliefs & attitutudes (but who are still susceptible to logic or intellectual suasion, to a sufficient degree), start out with emotionalist "arguments" in hopes of "setting the hook" - then, as you "reel them in," use an increasingly "logical" or non-emotionalist approach.