Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Tax-chick
What do you gain by posing this false dichotomy?

The dichotomy isn't false. It merely represents two extremes on a continuum.

If you are expressing a preference for tiny shorts and cut-off tank tops ...

I am expressing no such preference. This thread isn't about my preferences in dress. It is about the preferences of some women and their rights to indulge those preferences, even over the objections of others.

We do understand that a great many males like to look at women dressed in few or no clothes ...

I'm not sure who "we" is, but your observation is true, if patently obvious and not particularly germane.

37 posted on 08/28/2011 8:40:31 AM PDT by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: IronJack

Presenting two extremes - or any two points - as if they are the only points - “this” or “that,” leaving out everything else - is the definition of “false dichotomy.”

Nobody has challenged anyone’s “right” to wear what they choose. The discussion was about the moral (and taste) implications of various types of dress.

The rules of Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan are “not germane” to the issue of suggestions for appropriate dress for Christian women, although, for some reason, you wish to claim they are.


38 posted on 08/28/2011 9:03:23 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("True education is not an adjustment to the world, but a defense against the world.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson