re: Republicans Fail to See the Biggest Issue Costing them Undecided Voters

quote:

---

That's a different discussion. A non-political discussion not appropriate for this board.

---

Of course it's appropriate and it's not a different discussion. It directly feeds into the political conversation about abortion. You can't talk tax policy without discussing more fundamental economic theory, but that doesn't mean all of those economic discussions should be moved to the Money Talk board.

quote:

---

Sure. Framing was used then, too.

---

It's interesting that you're discussing presuppositions, axioms, and premises in terms of "framing" rather than necessary preconditions for rational discussion.

quote:

---

Clearly there were lots of disagreements over the issue, hence the Civil War

---

Of course but the point is that it's important to discuss the premises of truth claims rather than just chalking everything up to just having differing opinions. Most people don't take time to consider why they hold the opinions that they hold, which is why these conversations are important.

quote:

---

All you're doing is stating your framing.

---

Defining terms and clearly stating presuppositions/premises isn't merely "framing". I'm explaining why truth claims require justification and how this discussion isn't merely about opinions.

quote:

---

The majority of the country doesn't agree, hence the data on how they see abortion as a political issue.

---

It doesn't matter if they agree or not in terms of the discussion itself or the arguments themselves. I don't personally care what the country agrees on in this particular discussion as that is irrelevant to the arguments being presented.

quote:

---

Sure, and as I said, if your assumption/framing is not valid, then the bans on these exceptions turn to the irrational/emotional side. Or, as I said specifically:

Remove this framing and it becomes emotional to oppose the exceptions.

Repeating your framing to create the same paradigm it produces is nothing more than repeating the existence of your framing.

---

All you're saying is that if you remove logic from an argument you are left with opinion. That's exactly what I've already said. I then explained why it's important to support your premises in an argument, which is what I've been doing. You aren't arguing against my premises but only saying that if my premises were wrong that I wouldn't have a rational argument. That's a tautology and doesn't actually help anything.

Sure, if my argument is illogical then the result is that it is illogical, but my point is that the argument for rape as an exception is illogical and explaining why. If you would like to provide a rational basis for why you disagree with me, then do it, otherwise you're just talking in circles and not providing anything of substance.