It is the situation on the immigration threads and others that cause the loss of otherwise good posters.
Most don't understand why it happens and how hard it is for the mods to decipher what and who is at fault.
I wanted to find some way to explain it. So that it can be prevented in the future.
If anything, it helps me to avoid the big ones, channel the argument by pointing out the difference between defense of a conviction and a true, logical discussion.
I don't know if it will work on everyone. But it is better than avoiding the threads.
If the mods can understand why a conversation went sour, they can perhaps avoid waiting until a offense is committed.
You're just way too logical for someone from Arkansas. You aren't originally from there, are you? :)
CH, you ignorant slut.
OK, OK, I just had to say that.
I think you need to distinguish between a logically arrived conviction and a religious conviction. I have logically arrived at the conviction that you can't trust the government. Even if every elected official is trustworthy, you simply can't trust the government. I can argue that because I arrived at it logically.
I have a religious conviction that man is not an intelligent mammal but an entirely different KIND. I believe it and can discuss the theology behind it, but I can not argue it with someone who does not believe in the G-d of Abraham because we have no common basis for our discussion. However, I can usually agree to disagree on those because I recognize the trap.
Shalom.