Political Crossfire Forums

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

I just wanted to make sure you were all aware of the fact that a car is not a vehicle.

sparsely · Joined: 20 May 2006 Posts: 1674

I think your door is ajar.

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

that's the funniest comeback I could've asked for.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7657

straw man wrote: I just wanted to make sure you were all aware of the fact that a car is not a vehicle.

What ever floats your boat.

The Grandmaster · Posted: Wed May 24, 2006 11:36 pm Post subject:

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

A car is a potential vehicle.

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

My last response was a potential response.

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

Is the car a car when it first starts being built? Or does it become a car when its engine turns on? What if a headlight is out? What if 2 of the exact same car are made?

The Grandmaster · Posted: Wed May 24, 2006 11:51 pm Post subject:

AllAmericanMan wrote: Is the car a car when it first starts being built? Or does it become a car when its engine turns on? What if a headlight is out? What if 2 of the exact same car are made?

Matters how a car is defined. Which ultimately, is arbitrary. :wink:

But if we cannot demonstrate it is a car...

Then it does not have the right to live inside another car agaist the other cars will. :lol:

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

Quote: Then it does not have the right to live inside another car agaist the other cars will. LOL obviously you get the humorous nature of this thread so far.

The Grandmaster · Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 12:17 am Post subject:

AllAmericanMan wrote: Quote: Then it does not have the right to live inside another car agaist the other cars will. LOL obviously you get the humorous nature of this thread so far.

Indeed I do. :)

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

It's not a "vehicle" until it starts to transport passengers and things. Before then the car is simply a mass lump of steel and miscellanious parts.

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

This is gunna get ripped apart by pro abortionists who will say this has nothing to do with abortion. Then they will go on other threads and draw similar analogies to a seed and cancer cell.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7657

AllAmericanMan wrote: This is gunna get ripped apart by pro abortionists who will say this has nothing to do with abortion. Then they will go on other threads and draw similar analogies to a seed and cancer cell.

:roll:

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7657

straw man wrote: It's not a "vehicle" until it starts to transport passengers and things. Before then the car is simply a mass lump of steel and miscellanious parts.

If passengers includes the driver, then yes.

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

And if you say "a car is a vehicle" you must be wrong, because these definitions are made up by somebody. Since someobody made up the definition for what constitutes a "vehicle" then it must be incorrect to call it that.

And if you have a state law or something that requires to have all your vehicles insured, don't worry about getting your car insured, because it is not actually a vehicle. It only has the potential to become a vehicle, but is not yet a vehicle. And since the term "vehicle" is only based on people's subjective arbitrary viewpoint, and was made up by somebody, it would be incorrect to use the term to refer to a car.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7657

straw man wrote: And if you say "a car is a vehicle" you must be wrong, because these definitions are made up by somebody. Since someobody made up the definition for what constitutes a "vehicle" then it must be incorrect to call it that.

And if you have a state law or something that requires to have all your vehicles insured, don't worry about getting your car insured, because it is not actually a vehicle. It only has the potential to become a vehicle, but is not yet a vehicle. And since the term "vehicle" is only based on people's subjective arbitrary viewpoint, and was made up by somebody, it would be incorrect to use the term to refer to a car.

You can call a car whatever you want. If you have a car sitting there, never been driven (even by test drivers), how do you know it is a car?

Also, your attacks against the subjective truth are foolhardy at best. Redefine your arguments into intelligent claims so that I may refute them accordingly.

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

LostSoul3412 wrote: straw man wrote: And if you say "a car is a vehicle" you must be wrong, because these definitions are made up by somebody. Since someobody made up the definition for what constitutes a "vehicle" then it must be incorrect to call it that.

And if you have a state law or something that requires to have all your vehicles insured, don't worry about getting your car insured, because it is not actually a vehicle. It only has the potential to become a vehicle, but is not yet a vehicle. And since the term "vehicle" is only based on people's subjective arbitrary viewpoint, and was made up by somebody, it would be incorrect to use the term to refer to a car.

You can call a car whatever you want. If you have a car sitting there, never been driven (even by test drivers), how do you know it is a car?

Also, your attacks against the subjective truth are foolhardy at best. Redefine your arguments into intelligent claims so that I may refute them accordingly.

Here is my intelligent claim to constitute my argument:

a car is not a vehicle.

Go ahead and refute it. I dare you.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7657

straw man wrote: Here is my intelligent claim to constitute my argument:

a car is not a vehicle.

Go ahead and refute it. I dare you.

Why? How is my life effected because you say a car is not a vehicle?

straw man · Joined: 19 Apr 2006 Posts: 2948

Why? Because I know my claim is false, but I don't know how it could possibly be refuted.

It is equally incorrect to say a car is not a vehicle as to say a fetus is not a human life. But when I try to claim how a fetus IS a life, I keep running into these roadblocks of people claiming the dictionary doesn't count and it's all just subjective etc. etc. etc. so the reason I want my claim refuted here is so that I know how it can be done, so I can use that method to show how a fetus is indeed a human life, because my methods clearly weren't working. Care to help me out and show me how such a claim can be invalidated?