Pretend to be an ''anti'' ... could you?


PDA






P95Carry
December 18, 2003, 10:14 PM
Not sure why this came to mind .. and doubt I would ever want to try it - but ... on reflection I realize that ... nope ... I could NOT succeed. All my RKBA and 2A stuff would somehow come to the fore.

Could you? Pretend?? Even as a ''wind-up''?

If you enjoyed reading about "Pretend to be an ''anti'' ... could you?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
cracked butt
December 18, 2003, 10:25 PM
Easy- turn off brain, open mouth.

nico
December 18, 2003, 10:29 PM
I think it'd be easier for me to be a vegan, or maybe to claw my eyes out:D

Combat-wombat
December 18, 2003, 10:38 PM
Well, to be an anti, you'd somehow have to swap your brain with that of a chipmunk. hmm...

Preacherman
December 18, 2003, 10:46 PM
Just think of a gun as being a socialist liberal... that ought to do it! :D

williegee
December 18, 2003, 10:56 PM
No. Fortunately, my wife and I surround ourselves with people that are either Pro-2A and if they're not , at least, respect our views on the subject.

sm
December 18, 2003, 11:11 PM
I have attended meetings where guns where evil. I have asked for a big stack of anti handouts on campus, or malls. When the panic of Glocks and X-ray machines hit many years ago , and asked If a "Glock would go off in a X-ray machine":scrutiny: I replied "Yeah sure if some knucklehead pulls the trigger while passing through machine". :rolleyes: For some reason my reply did not connect with any gray matter of Sally Sheeple.

I just wanted to see what the shee...enemy was up to, oh and some kids were in need of paper for confetti...lots and lots of confetti. :)

I hide in plain site real well. I can nod my head real well, betweeen my backpack and my friend's backpack, and that *ahem* empty box I needed/wanted ...did I mention lots and lots and lots of confetti? It was a really big party for a day care...hey it was for the children. :p

P95Carry
December 18, 2003, 11:13 PM
For some reason my reply did not connect with any gray matter of Sally Sheeple. hehehe! Nice Steve ... I think your humor ''zany'' factor even exceeds mine!!:p :D

ACP230
December 18, 2003, 11:15 PM
My Molon Labe hat would give me away.

greg700
December 18, 2003, 11:15 PM
Sure, I bet most of us could, if we adopted the right perspective.

After all, we already know all the anti-2A arguments by heart.

I think the trick would be to think of it as a social-experiment. I.e. can you make these people even more anti by spewing nonsense. It would be fun, and at the end of the night you could tell them that you deliberately failed to present a single rational argument and they hung on your every word anyway :)

P95Carry
December 18, 2003, 11:24 PM
Greg .... yeah that just might work .. for some. :p

Me? I am no actor ... and I would crack up and explode into laughter - long before completing my mission of deception!!:D I doubt I could hold together!

sm
December 18, 2003, 11:30 PM
Hey Chris,
I don't even need "tacky pills". :D I was not the only one present for free eats and soft drinks. Somebody *ahem* got a group together to attend...we had an agenda, we did what had to be done. They were "so proud of the turnout ...as judged by paperwork and eats".

Hey if a college person gets a free meal, frees up money for ammo. Never took an Econ class...makes sense to me. ;)

Explains my email addy huh? :p

P95Carry
December 18, 2003, 11:37 PM
Explains my email addy huh? There's a ''rebel'' in all of us i reckon Steve .. and mine has gotten worse with age .. not better!!:p :D

dave3006
December 19, 2003, 12:58 AM
Guns are only for killing. They are bad. Real bad. They need to be banned. Then, banned again just to be sure. Especially the mean looking black ones. Why does anyone need a gun? The police will protect us. The prison system guarrantees criminals are rehabilitated when they are released. If you are afraid, just get a loud whistle. If you have a gun, they can take it from you and shoot you. Really. Guns are bad.

Can't we all just get along?

sm
December 19, 2003, 01:55 AM
Ok, we have established that I'm an rebel. I do stuff real simple to counter the anti's, like the above and my infamous "trigger lock on the fire extinguisher".

You know those free gun locks that were being handed out so those evil guns wouldn't work? I just happened to hear a bunch were being given out at a local K-Mart, goody I rushed on down. Yep we have anti's on a corner with a tent , lemonade and "real LONG cable type" gun locks...I made out like a bandit.

I needed these locks. I had the tools and set up, I also had some new shooters. So these being the cable type, I converted to a handgun size Otis type pull through cleaning tool. :D The ladies liked the different colors, and so it only worked with patches, most didn't have cleaning stuff, they liked the pull through Otis system I demonstrated, they have to get started somewhere/somehow...and ladies really like little gifts and momentos.

Chivalry is not dead, chilvary is a blue, red, green, yellow, or purple (purple the most wanted color btw) pull through cable, when you get instuctions and pass your CCW qual. :D

Good thing I hide in plain site well...probably on a anti wanted poster somewhere...:p

Funny, that K-Mart never rec'd any monies of mine...and won't...it is out of business now...;)

goon
December 19, 2003, 02:08 AM
I doubt it.
I usually don't tell people immediately that I am a gunowner, but they figure it out just by the way I act.
I can't say how, they just do.
And lately, the comments about chewing my accounting book to shreds with my Kalashnikov have also drawn some attention.
I try to be low key, but it just doesn't work.

Drjones
December 19, 2003, 04:42 AM
I could parrot their lines, but that's about it.

I'm not a communist, and fortunately, I've been endowed with a brain.

As such, I would make for a poor liberal and anti-gun person.

dischord
December 19, 2003, 05:50 AM
fortunately, I've been endowed with a brain. Many of the antis are quite smart, especially those in charge. We'd be wise not to underestimate them or to get too distracted by bragging about our brain size.

SDC
December 19, 2003, 07:06 AM
I couldn't do it with a straight face; I prefer to debate these morons face to face, and when they find out that their version of "the truth" has no basis in reality, they suddenly remember they were supposed to be somewhere else at that particular time.

Mark Tyson
December 19, 2003, 07:43 AM
Oh yeah. Definitely. I can talk the talk if I want to.

I've pretended to be a radical and slipped into a few quasi-commie circles just for fun a few times. (In case you're wondering they're not very happy these days.) It's pretty funny to see these guys whine and squirm.

And their literature makes good kindling.

Ransom
December 19, 2003, 08:11 AM
For a college class I had to write on both sides of an issue. For Anti I came up with some decent arguments but nothing that couldnt be struck down. Its hard to adopt a stance when you know the antitheses of every point you make.

Zach S
December 19, 2003, 09:38 AM
hehe, I've "pretended" to be an anti, while spitting out pro-2A stats. As you can imagine, it wasnt easy to pull off. I eventaully got busted when my then-GF started laughing. I wish she coulda contained her laughter a little longer, I was starting to get somewhere...

hso
December 19, 2003, 09:43 AM
Sure

Highschool level debate/critical thinking classes teach you how to take on a position that you may not believe in, research it, and present arguments supporting it. I would hope that memebers here are up to such a challenge.

HankB
December 19, 2003, 10:09 AM
Pretend to be an "anti?"

Sure, once I had to do it for a high school class . . . for example, I argued that there's no good reason a woman needs a gun to fend off an assault by a rapist - I mean, she's likely to survive, so other than a few bruises and wounded pride, after (maybe) a trip to the abortion doctor and a shot of penicillin, she'll recover. (This was pre-AIDS) If she were to shoot and kill the poor misguided soul who attacked her - well, he'd be dead, and there would be no hope of of his being rehabilitated and becoming a productive member of society, so we'd ALL be the poorer for this.

Funny, the (female) teacher who gave me this assignment really wasn't looking for this sort of argument, and really wasn't too pleased that I had ready bleats . . . errr, I mean answers . . . to her questions. Go figure. :rolleyes:

(FOR THE RECORD - I actually believe the hypothetical woman described above should shoot her assailant. Repeatedly. With something big.)

fiVe
December 19, 2003, 10:23 AM
Shucks, no. That would feel like taking a bath with your socks on.

Scooter .45
December 19, 2003, 10:52 AM
In today's sue-happy society I could make a real good argument for avoiding the use of deadly force in self-defense. I agree it's better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6. However, if you enjoy an affluent, happy lifestyle then think of the living hell your life could become as a result of lawsuits, it makes ya think.

Don't misunderstand, I'm totally pro-gun, but I could see why someone would be afraid of the legal aspects.

BTW, when they send you to prison for using a gun, be careful about bending over in the shower :uhoh: Hmmm...maybe being carried by 6 wouldn't be such a bad alternative :(

Remington Employee
December 19, 2003, 11:28 AM
I've gone to several different Anti-gun anti-american rallys just to get to know the enemy. I even signed up for that stupid million moron mommy newsletter to see just what they're up to. Signed up for the meet up mailing list only to find out there's only 5 people singed up in our area.LOL!

I went to the UN 50th Anniversary , ate their food, kept my eyes and ears open and during the question and answer perid, I asked legitamate questions the main speaker couldn't answer! LOL!

Everyone should "infiltrate" and anti-organazation in your area. You need to get to be one of their officers or boardmembers locally, that way you can help waste their resouruces in meaningless ways!:banghead: :neener:

45R
December 19, 2003, 12:14 PM
Humm sure


GUNs are bad...they are very bad





























If you forget your 4 Rules of Gunsafety!!!!! :neener:

t-stox
December 19, 2003, 12:20 PM
Please don't hate me for writing the following but I like to be able to see the arguement from both sides, It's called being open minded! Here goes......and no it wont be sarcastic. Guns are used in crimes which lead to the death of 10000 people every year. Childeren are killed by accident in the hundreds due to neglegent gun owners. Your more likely to be killed by your own gun than use it against someone in self defense. You are more likely to kill someone you know with your gun than against a total stranger. Assault weapons serve no sporting OR self defense purposes therefore should be banned. More police are killed with handguns every year than from any other weapon. Geez i'm streaching my brain and can't think of anything else. layta.

cordex
December 19, 2003, 12:37 PM
To what extent?

Feanaro
December 19, 2003, 12:44 PM
I could parrot the lines and turn off the rational part of my brain. But otherwise I could not REALLY fake it. I don't dress the part and certain ingrained habits would give me away, if anyone wanted to look.

Correia
December 19, 2003, 01:11 PM
I had an english class once (uber liberal professor) that required us to write 3 papers on a topic. So of course I chose guns. The first was a fact based paper, no slant. The second was your pro paper, and the third was an anti paper. Then we had to debate in class to defend our real position.

Writing the anti paper was one of the hardest things I have ever done. I had to come up with something like ten pages of crap. :D Finally I just disengaged my brain and coasted along, spouting off all sorts of false information and huge leaps of logic. It came out sounding like a VPC press release. Got an A. :)

P95Carry
December 19, 2003, 01:26 PM
To what extent? The whole enchelada Cordex ...... ''Total Brady''!!!

For me - as I said before ..... no way am I an actor or proficient liar .. so it wouldn't work ... well not vocally!

I daresay if I had to write a paper then perhaps I could manage .. something .... BS is always possible!! Plus, I'd not give anything away with facial expressions!:D

buzz_knox
December 19, 2003, 01:29 PM
It's easy to pretend to be an anti. All you have to do is keep repeating to yourself "why would you want to let someone be able to kill another human being." Combine that with the socialization/indoctrination that's been going on for decades in this country, and you've got the anti mentality.

The fact is that there are some really tragic and hard consequences of gun ownership, where said ownership is abused. But getting past the gut reaction to those and recognizing that 1) the benefits outweigh the costs,
2) there is a fundamental right of self-defense and guns are the best tools for exercising those rights, and 3) misuse/abuse of a tool does not justify banning said tool for those who do not commit crimes or cause accidents is the basis for being a rational, thinking human being.

raz-0
December 19, 2003, 01:40 PM
Well, It depends on what you mean. If you mean come off as a rabid anti, no, my heart jsut wouldn'tbe in it and you could tell I lacked that glint of ferver in my eye.

But as for blending into the anti crowd, well, anyone can. Just keep mostly quiet and nod. Theya re the type of people who will make plenty of statements and assume lack of dissent means you msut agree with them.

Wildalaska
December 19, 2003, 01:55 PM
How do you define anti?

WildcuriousAlaska

buzz_knox
December 19, 2003, 02:08 PM
Well, IIRC the short-hand definition used on this board, its predecessor, and pretty much every other one I've ever seen is someone opposed to firearms ownership by civilians or, in some cases, even most police.

Trisha
December 19, 2003, 02:26 PM
I'm a long-term traumatic brain injury survivor, and even being a natural blonde I still can't think their way!

:uhoh:

Maybe that's what's wrong with me!

:D

"Know thy enemy" is great, but I think I'd rather take a hike through an Escher print than try and follow their thinking!

Trisha

geekWithA.45
December 19, 2003, 02:30 PM
I tried it once.

It was such an offense to nature and the universe that the laws of physics began to unravel, and I realized that I had best stop before the gears and pinions fell out of the cosmos, and reality became unglued.

grampster
December 19, 2003, 02:47 PM
Well, P95, cough, ahem, umm, I not only think guns are danderous, bad, evil and unconstitutional, as any true red blooded Amerycan would. I am renting a large truck and I'm going to start in the Peoples Republic of New Jersey next tuesday and will make a sweep through the lower 48 states to pick up all the nasty, dirty, evil looking guns. I won't go to Alaska because that's Wildalaska'sturftoseetoo. Watch yer newspapers fer the schedule of my arivals in yer hometown.

I, as a public service, will take charge of any and all firearms in order to pertect all a youens from yerselfs. Look fer me as the side of my truck will have a large :D :D on both sides and a :neener: :neener: on the back.

grampster

Drjones
December 19, 2003, 02:49 PM
Many of the antis are quite smart, especially those in charge. We'd be wise not to underestimate them or to get too distracted by bragging about our brain size.

Who said anything about underestimating them?

And I'm sorry, but I must disagree about them being smart. Educated perhaps, but smart or intelligent, sorry.

I can hardly call a person smart who insists on holding beliefs that have been proven time and time again to be wrong and harmful to humanity.

Cosmoline
December 19, 2003, 03:20 PM
The effectiveness of firearm laws in reducing violent crime cannot be disputed. For example, the first federal firearm law, the NFA of 1934, had an immediate impact in reducing the number of fully automatic firearms available to criminals. Prior to the NFA, criminal gangs were increasingly armed with terrifying arsenals of military weapons. Clyde Barrow's gang, John Dillinger, and others boasted an array of fully automatic firearms and sawed off shotguns. In the wake of the NFA, criminals were forced to turn to handguns, which were exempted from the act due to pressure from the nascent gun rights lobby. Had handguns been included in the 1934 ban, there is every reason to conclude that today we would not be seeing the current rash of handgun violence. What we need is to amend the NFA to include handguns, as it was originally supposed to. This will bring these dangerous weapons under strict control and forbid them to all but serious collectors and competitive shooters.

:D

P95Carry
December 19, 2003, 03:22 PM
Wild Alaska ... ........ "define anti" ... you serious?!:p

As has been said .. and i think this will go for most here .. the anti is someone who suffers an irrational fear of firearms and would be happeier if they were altogether gone. They then forget tho that once the legit private citizen is disarmed .. the bad guys continue ... all but unhindered by the ''armed citizen''.

Many anti's seem to want such total disarmament that it is hard not to think of all the countries where this has been attempted and where genocide has resulted .. unfettered genocide.

My prob trying to pretend to be an anti - would be (apart from trying to keep a straight face!) ..... the sheer illogicality of what I would have to try and say ...... too impossible to vocalize - without vomiting perhaps!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Grampster .......... let me know when you will be by my place ..... I'll talk you out of the gun grab ... and we'll sit down over a ''nog and malt'' ..... which I now know you enjoy ........ and ''chill out'' as they say!!:)

Wildalaska
December 19, 2003, 03:32 PM
As has been said .. and i think this will go for most here .. the anti is someone who suffers an irrational fear of firearms and would be happeier if they were altogether gone.

OK then for the purpose of this excersize, if one has no prob with the Insta check system, with prohibiting felons from owning firearms then he or she is not an anti yes?


The effectiveness of firearm laws in reducing violent crime cannot be disputed. For example, the first federal firearm law, the NFA of 1934, had an immediate impact in reducing the number of fully automatic firearms available to criminals. Prior to the NFA, criminal gangs were increasingly armed with terrifying arsenals of military weapons. Clyde Barrow's gang, John Dillinger, and others boasted an array of fully automatic firearms and sawed off shotguns.

Well heck Cosmo, is that point correct statisticly at least...?

WildcuriosAlaska

P95Carry
December 19, 2003, 03:47 PM
Wild ........ hmmm .... we've all been here before methinks!!

Sure, no one is a great fan of NICS .... and for many too .... ''a right - is a right - is a right'' ... etc.

I draw a distinction however .. trying to keep this simple!! ....... between the anti's almost total obsession with wanting to ''ban'' most all guns in private ownership .... that is the true anti... they hate about anyone owning guns (except maybe their bodyguards!!!) ....... having the naive notion that removal of all (legit) guns will solve all problems.

The restrictions placed on felon's purchases or aquisitions are to my mind not a true ''anti'' stance at all. It is a specific restriction ... distasteful tho that may be when considering ''rights'' per se. But we are stuck with that anyways.

I won't take it further than that ..... or we'll be debating all day when I should be working!!:p :)

ny32182
December 19, 2003, 03:53 PM
And I'm sorry, but I must disagree about them being smart. Educated perhaps, but smart or intelligent, sorry.

Many antis are incredibly smart. Take Bill and Hillary. Both are VERY, VERY smart, VERY intelligent people. They are both EXCEPTIONALLY adept at their chosen profession. It takes brains and major determination to become the President of the US (if you're not born into it :neener: )


I can hardly call a person smart who insists on holding beliefs that have been proven time and time again to be wrong and harmful to humanity.

You make the assumption that polititians have the best interests of society at heart. In fact, they do not. The national "anti" leaders are self serving, power hungry individuals who don't give a damn about the best interests of society. This, however, does not mean that they are not intelligent. They have done an excellent job of selling the idea of gun control "for the children" to the sheeple of the United States, in order to advance their own agendas. This REQUIRES cunning and fantastic marketing by definition. They are very smart... they are just working toward different goals than we are.

Edit to add: If you were referring to the rank and file knee-jerk anti "soccer mom", I'm way more inclined to agree with you.

jhisaac1
December 19, 2003, 04:10 PM
I'm not sure I could do it.

Them: "Guns are bad and evil and should be banned blah blah blah"
Me: BLLLUUURCCCCHHHHH :barf:
Them: "Are you OK?"
Me: "Um yeah, the...um....er...very thought of a gun makes me sick to my stomach. Yeah That's the ticket."
Them: "Oh, you poor boy. Everybody sing Kum-by-Yah"

MicroBalrog
December 19, 2003, 04:12 PM
Well heck Cosmo, is that point correct statisticly at least...?

We don't really know, now do we?

Probably not, though.

Mad Man
December 20, 2003, 10:52 PM
Pretend to be an ''anti'' ... could you?

Absolutely.

Remember the end of the Star Trek episode Mirror, Mirror (http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/TOS/episode/68738.html)?

After returning from the parallel universe, Kirk asks Spock how he was able to spot the Evil Kirk so quickly. Spock's answer was something to the effect of "It is easy for civilized men to masquerade as barbarians, but not for barbarians to act like civilized men."

I'm sure somebody geekier than me has the exact quote.

jimpeel
December 21, 2003, 02:04 AM
If it weren't for "law abiding" gun owners there wouldn't be guns on the street. Everyone knows that the main source of guns for criminals is "law abiding" gun owners who won't properly store their guns.

This is why 14 children per day are killed by guns.

This is why over 30,000 people died from guns.

But for the availability of guns, the suicide rate would be half of what it is. This is why the Assault Weapons Bill needs to not only be renewed but strengthened to include all assault weapons without restriction. We need to stop the proliferation of these weapons of war NOW!

This is why one out of every five police officers killed in the line of duty is killed by an assault weapon.

Sensible people know that we need to close the gun show loophole permanently nationwide. We need to require all gun owners to secure their guns or risk prison if their guns are misused; with enhanced penalties if the misuse is by a child.

Congressionally mandated nationwide registration of firearms, and firearms owners, would help reduce the number of homicides in America and free us from this scourge that darkens our nation.

Yeah, I could probably convince someone I was an anti-gunner.

How'd I do? :neener: :evil:

Scary, huh?

Stinkyshoe
December 21, 2003, 03:28 AM
I've tried, just to mess with people...and I couldn't keep a strait face.:D :evil: :D :neener:

clubsoda22
December 21, 2003, 04:15 AM
the measure of how good of a pursuasive arguer you are is how well you could argue for the other side.

Personally, i have so much of the "other sides" rhetoric memorized i can and have on occasion pretended to be an anti to test some pro gunners skills.

Dilettante
December 21, 2003, 04:27 AM
You guys...it's just acting!

Clubsoda has a good point here. When politicians practice for a debate, one of their own campaign team usually plays the opponent.

Same concept.

Actually, I bet many of us could come up with better arguments than they usually present. ;)

RCReecer
December 21, 2003, 07:15 AM
I tried it once and it got me highly irregular, And I swore I'd never do it again --Jimmy Buffett "God's Own Drunk"


I couldn't be an anti, even for a day. It's physically impossible for me to walk around with my head up my a**.

tailgunner
December 21, 2003, 11:25 AM
I sign up for every anti-program I can. As Homer Bundy! I love having them pay to send me all of their propaganda, especially those nice pre-postage paid envelopes. My Christmas mailings were virtually free this year and all of MY relatives appreciated the antis paying the postage.

jimpeel
December 21, 2003, 01:24 PM
It's physically impossible for me to walk around with my head up my a**.That's because you lack the one feature that the antis have -- a little window in their bellybutton; rose colored, I might add.

Zundfolge
December 21, 2003, 02:27 PM
When I was young and single, I pretended to be a liberal quite often, because quite frankly, liberal chicks put out!

Now that I'm older, married and becoming somewhat of a cermugeon, I doubt I could pull it off ... not even for sex.

sm
December 21, 2003, 02:46 PM
jimpeel :
How'd I do?
Very scary indeed Sir!!
Humm maybe cant your head and blank stare a bit more...but dang that was good! Now go get your anti paid for box lunch, and soda. You can grab that other *ahem* empty box...oh want run to the mall parking lot? I hear they have more gun locks to give away...;)

michiganfan
December 21, 2003, 04:08 PM
Sure as long as i dont have to give up my guns. Cause for Beth i pretended to be a down skier. For Jill i pretended I liked Nascar, for Diane i pretended to like opera. With enogh incentive i could pretend I was never going to buy another gun...well i guess there are limits to my acting ability.

Black Snowman
December 21, 2003, 04:30 PM
I've never come out and told anyone I was pro gun when there's an anti discussion going on. I play it cool and ask for explinations. By the time their done answering my questions for my own "education" they tend to have learned a bit ;)

A few times when asked directly I have admitted to being Liberitarian :D

telewinz
December 21, 2003, 07:41 PM
It saddens me that many on this thread take their opponents so lightly. Anti-gunners can be very intelligent, and can present a good credible argument for their beliefs. Preaching to the choir may not tax your mind but it doesn't win any converts either. After all its the intelligent, hardworking types that hold the influence, not the types with the biggest smile or the most confidence.

Past gun control and the banning of firearms only proves that half-hearted attempts don't work, we just need to apply sincere and powerful gun control measures. A half bucket of water might not put out the fire, but a firehose will.

P95Carry
December 21, 2003, 08:32 PM
Must say tele' .. as thread starter ... I for one do NOT under-rate these people. As more than one have said .. they are VERY intelligent - and shrewd (sneaky?) too. Main difference is in their seeming inability to see logic ... they have a gross ''perspective'' problem.

My difficulty in trying to ''pretend'' would be mostly that the whole anti position is so anathema to me that ...... I really do not think I could act it out successfully.

I would (and have ) been the ''quiet'' observer when in amongst these people ... listen a lot ... and try and ask questions when appropriate - to try and make em think - properly!! Sometimes that helps.

telewinz
December 22, 2003, 06:50 AM
In my experience, it takes just as much intelligence and experience to promote an issue as it does to condemn one. The most deadly anti-gunner would be a former pro-gunner, glad I can't think of any right now.

Rogelio
December 29, 2003, 02:35 PM
Highschool level debate/critical thinking classes teach you how to take on a position that you may not believe in, research it, and present arguments supporting it. I would hope that memebers here are up to such a challenge.

That is true....but maybe start by sometihing different...try writing an essay pro chocolate and then refute evry single part of it ! Being an anti should not be any harder..just talk stupid things! It demands no brain skill at all...

edited to add: P95Carry, there are many different "intelligences" (donĀ“t know the english word for it), and there is a book that shows that even if a person is great at math, his "linguistic" or "logical" or "sensitive" intelligence may not be high or developed at all.

Maybe they are just "freedomly stupid", or as I like to call them: "Constitutionally challenged"

Cosmoline
December 29, 2003, 06:07 PM
Backing for my argument? I'm an ANTI! What part of that didn't you understand? :D

Mulliga
January 14, 2004, 06:34 PM
I'd like to think we could all pretend to be an anti.

Reminds me of that episode of Star Trek [NERD ALERT] :): (not exact quotes, either)

"Mirror, Mirror" - the one with the evil Enterprise and the evil crew from the alternate universe.

Kirk: But how did you know they were from the mirror universe?

Spock: Civilized men can pretend to be barbarians, but barbarians cannot pretend to be civilized.

Stevie-Ray
January 14, 2004, 07:29 PM
Very scary indeed Sir!! dang that was good! Yeah, but since he was writing it, you didn't see that thing he does with his eye.:D

jimpeel
January 14, 2004, 11:30 PM
What thing I do with my eye? :scrutiny:

ctdonath
January 15, 2004, 12:34 PM
I'll second clubsoda22.

Your own opinion is worth more if you can present a good solid argument for the other side. You need to understand the paradigms, fears, and axioms of the opposition before you can truly effectively refute them, precisely because those fundamentals are why the resulting views are held.

45King
January 15, 2004, 01:37 PM
Which is more difficult....for an intelligent person to appear to be incredibly dumb, or a dumb person to appear to be intelligent?

Mike Irwin
January 15, 2004, 02:02 PM
Well, I've fooled all of you into thinking that I'm a pro-gun Republican, so yeah, why not? :evil:

If you enjoyed reading about "Pretend to be an ''anti'' ... could you?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!