Live Results

[Tom62]

First off, you ask why hate illegals(sorry, that's what they are).

Calling people "illegals" dehumanizes them. A person who is in the US without proper documents is not a criminal. The civil law procedure that leads to deportation of an undocumented resident of the United States is not a criminal prosecution. The fact is that there undoubtedly are undocumented people serving in the US military right now. You may not be ignorant and prejudiced, but continuing to use the term bespeaks ignorance and prejudice. It's a slur, plain and simple.

How is it possible that undocumented people could serve in the US military? Does the US have a foreign legion, like the French?

[Arturo]

First off, you ask why hate illegals(sorry, that's what they are).

Calling people "illegals" dehumanizes them. A person who is in the US without proper documents is not a criminal. The civil law procedure that leads to deportation of an undocumented resident of the United States is not a criminal prosecution. The fact is that there undoubtedly are undocumented people serving in the US military right now. You may not be ignorant and prejudiced, but continuing to use the term bespeaks ignorance and prejudice. It's a slur, plain and simple.

How is it possible that undocumented people could serve in the US military? Does the US have a foreign legion, like the French?

Many processes in America are done by people. Even the recruitment process in the military has a human element. They make mistakes.

[Davin]

One more thing. You asked about whether I discredit dine bible passages as hot air and accept others. I believe the bible is horse poopy, I am an atheist after all.

No, I didn't. Look again at what I asked.

No concession here.

Oh? You didn't respond to anything I said in the conversation, which is conceding by definition.

I also feel like I should specify what I mean by the opinion thing because it would be an easy thing to take that the wrong way. Of course, by definition, everything a person says is an opinion, what I object to is the "just" modifier. And my opinion these matters being better has little to do with me, it has to do with me basing my opinion on facts, statistics, and data, while you base your opinion, as far we can see, on hearsay and the first google link you find that supports your preconceived ideas.

I have two questions I'd to know the answer to:

Which do you think is the better opinion, one based on people just saying things or one based on reliable evidence?

And if you answer that the way I think a rational person should, if you find the latter to be better, why don't you base your own opinions on reliable evidence?

Edit: I a word.

[Davin]

And you back up your "facts" with more opinion and speculation. That's fine, like I said, I don't care to get into a serious in depth discussion about every detail.
These things could easily be busted up into their own threads, quick world be cool to hear everybody else's views add well.
Have a good day.

The best way to argue with Davin is not to argue with Davin. I gave up years ago. 

The best way to argue with me, is to not misrepresent me and to engage honestly. I do agree that you never learned that and gave up on it.