<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Guava</id>
	<title>Conservapedia - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Guava"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Guava"/>
	<updated>2026-10-10T14:48:36Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.35.14</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Liberal_logic&amp;diff=650031</id>
		<title>Liberal logic</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Liberal_logic&amp;diff=650031"/>
		<updated>2009-04-07T22:58:48Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Guava: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Liberal logic''' is a term used to describe arguments made by some [[liberal]]s that may appear logical, but are actually nonsensical.  Here are some examples:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
#assuming something is true, merely because Jesus said so (see [[appeal to authority]])&lt;br /&gt;
#assuming something is false, merely because &amp;quot;only&amp;quot; a liberal said it (see [[ad hominem]])&lt;br /&gt;
#claiming that their viewpoints are being censored, while actually they are the ones censoring their opponents&lt;br /&gt;
# frequent reliance on [[circular reasoning]], as in demanding censorship of [[intelligent design]] while simultaneously citing the resulting silence as proof against it&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;See, e.g., [[Richard Sternberg]].&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
# insisting that someone needs to experience something (e.g., drugs, pornography, gambling, etc.) before being able to criticize it&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1808 Bryn Mawr report on marijuana]. Many commentators said the reporter had no justification for his views since he had never tried marijuana. Examples of such liberal logic included: &amp;quot;There are pros and cons to everything under the sun. That dosen't (sic) mean that you shouldn't try it all...Besides marijuana is so much more beneficial then everyone realizes.&amp;quot; which was smartly replied to by another commenter with: &amp;quot;Following your logic, obviously there are PROS to:&lt;br /&gt;
*jumping off the Empire State Building&lt;br /&gt;
*anorexia&lt;br /&gt;
*drunk driving&lt;br /&gt;
*smoking crack or meth&lt;br /&gt;
*child molestation&lt;br /&gt;
*Shall I keep going?...&lt;br /&gt;
Sorry, but not only is your drug-induced logic utterly flawed, but you don't exactly exude intelligence. Forgive me if I don't join your crusade.&amp;quot; &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
# personal experience dictates personal views, rather than rising above bad and/or unusual experiences and basing one's views on [[logic]]&lt;br /&gt;
# claim that switching from heterosexual to [[homosexual]] is customary, but switching back is somehow impossible&lt;br /&gt;
# criticize [[Christians]] for literal interpretations of [[Genesis]], but then insist on even more literal interpretations when it suits the [[liberal]] ideology&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;For example, [[liberals]] here insist that [[homeschooling]] can only mean being taught while in someone's own home.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
# insisting that the [[Bible]] literally prohibits judging anything.&lt;br /&gt;
# no matter what happens in the weather, [[global warming]] caused it&lt;br /&gt;
# belief that a [[correlation]] and/or [[causation]] (e.g., between [[atheism]] and [[suicide]]) can be disproved by a [[counterexample]] (e.g., one [[atheist]] who remained sane)&lt;br /&gt;
# often a [[liberal]] responds to a logical comment or question with an (illogical) expression of personal like or dislike, as in &amp;quot;but I like it!&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
# never admit shame for [[liberal]] behavior, but often tell others they should be ashamed of themselves&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Americans]] should &amp;quot;move on&amp;quot; past the misconduct of [[Bill Clinton]] and [[Ted Kennedy]], but should dig up as much old dirt as possible about [[John McCain]]&lt;br /&gt;
# Highly implausible assumption like &amp;quot;if [[embryonic stem cell]] research will find the cure for paralysis, then would you support it?&amp;quot; (without any consideration of alternatives).&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Barack Obama]] on [[Afghanistan]]: with fewer soldiers, we didn't have enough ammo and humvees!&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21text-demdebate.html?sq=transcript&amp;amp;st=nyt&amp;amp;scp=2&amp;amp;pagewanted=print]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
# [[free speech]] for anything and everything ... except the [[conservative]] truth, and religion.&lt;br /&gt;
# insisting on &amp;quot;tolerance&amp;quot; for anything that is anti-[[Christian]], while censorship for anything is [[Christian]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Hollywood]] promotion of [[abortion]] is welcomed, but views of Hollywood actresses towards their own children are concealed&lt;br /&gt;
# carrying an unborn child to birth reduces risk of breast cancer, but choosing [[abortion]] rather than childbirth somehow does not increase the relative risk&lt;br /&gt;
# requesting increased spending by [[government]] to reduce poverty, when actually poverty is increased by the dependency&lt;br /&gt;
# claiming that an [[atheistic]] culture cannot harm anyone, but also insisting that classroom prayer can cause harm&lt;br /&gt;
# claiming that teaching [[abstinence]] does not reduce premarital sex and associated disease.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://media.www.mustangdaily.net/media/storage/paper860/news/2007/04/10/LettersToTheEditor/Teaching.AbstinenceOnly.Unrealistic-2831363.shtml&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
# claiming that premarital sex is fine&lt;br /&gt;
# claiming that increasing taxes must increase government revenue,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://capwiz.com/acu/issues/alert/?alertid=11534766&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; when often people just work less and revenues then decline&lt;br /&gt;
# denying that widespread ownership of guns, largely defensive weapons, can reduce crime&lt;br /&gt;
# Even though the [[Supreme Court]] overrules precedents every year by 5-4 votes, [[Roe v. Wade]] cannot be overruled, or can only be overruled if it is a unanimous 9-0 vote (this argument tries to make irreversible law out of the dicta in a weak majority opinion in ''[[Planned Parenthood v. Casey]]'', even though the very creation of that &amp;quot;secret opinion&amp;quot; was procured by [[liberal deceit]].)&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;See Jeffrey Toobin's ''The Nine''.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
# The pronoun &amp;quot;he&amp;quot; has been used to include men and women collectively for centuries, but [[liberals]] find that illogical today.&lt;br /&gt;
# Getting rid of a sadistic dictator by going into [[Iraq]] was wrong but stepping into [[Sudan]] is not. &lt;br /&gt;
# The [[United Nations]] is better suited to judge and direct a country's actions rather than the country itself.&lt;br /&gt;
# It is a right to dissent against [[American]] policy but never take a stand if that [[logic]] moves beyond dissent and becomes treason.&lt;br /&gt;
# Stating &amp;quot;God of the gaps&amp;quot; to justify atheism   &lt;br /&gt;
# The wondrous, pristine national park of [[ANWR]] needs protection to keep its beauty. Though, it is but a remote barren tundra that few visit. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://townhall.com/columnists/MaryFallin/2008/07/24/anwrs_place_in_our_energy_picture ANWR's Place In Our Energy Picture] Townhall.com, July 24, 2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
# It's not fair to the world that [[America]] keeps the thermostat at 72 degrees at all times. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13459 Freedom and the View From Obamaland] American Spectator, July 1, 2008&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
# It is okay to demean an African-American if they are a [[conservative]], but if they are a [[liberal]] then you are a [[racist]].&lt;br /&gt;
#It is okay to demean a woman if they are a [[conservative]], but if they are [[liberal]] then you are [[sexist]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{Liberalism}}&lt;br /&gt;
[[category:Liberalism]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Logic]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:oxymoron]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Guava</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>