like aside from politics what do you think about his reasoning, see : https://rumble.com/v4smln6-i-got-baptised-this-is-why....html
Share your thoughts…
like aside from politics what do you think about his reasoning, see : https://rumble.com/v4smln6-i-got-baptised-this-is-why....html
Share your thoughts…
I think he’s a piece of shit rapist who’s trying to do the “I’m a Christian” defense, just like that pedophile Milo Yiannopolous did.
Good luck with that, you rapist fuck.
hmmm, first take and you fell for Ad Hominem fallacy, I’m asking about his reasoning, even if he was the worst human-being to walk earth, he might have a solid reasoning, so you added nothing to the conversation, did you even watch the video ?
Edit : reasoning =/= agenda
No they explained what they think his reasoning is.
They think he’s doing it to use Christianity as a defense against his rape accusations. Regardless of what the video says.
Also fallacy fallacy there from you.
The reason it’s a clear fallacy for both of you now is, you said it yourself:
what’s that have to do with his reasoning of why he converted to Christianity?
Even if it turns out he’s rapist ( which it didn’t yet, because the accuser doesn’t exist yet, believe it or not ), it doesn’t automatically make anything he says untrue…!!
just watch the video
I told you his reasoning. His reasoning is that if he pretends to be a Christian, people will forget that he’s a rapist and his career will be saved.
Edit: that’s agenda, not reasoning ( way of thinking )
Ok, I will go with you there… Even though it’s not what I originally asked for in this post… ( Do you see now Why it’s a fallacy? )
Can you prove he raped someone?
Why do I need to prove he raped someone? I’m not a lawyer.
ding ding ding…you fell for another one…
shifting the burden of proof won’t do you good in future debates, just saying
Cool, I’m not debating you on whether or not Russell Brand is a rapist because I really don’t care about your opinion when you don’t even notice that I answered your question and claim I didn’t.
If you want to know what people think, don’t criticize them when they tell you.
You did tell me what you think, and I appreciate your honesty, but I didn’t criticize you… like on a personal level if that’s what you mean… I didn’t crtisize anyone on this thread on a personal level ( yet everyone seem to take their dislike for Russell Brand on me, which is sad to see ) because I asked a question about Russell Brand’s take, not Russell Brand himself… Not the person but the reasoning of that person…
I didn’t say tell me what you think of Russell Brand?, instead : tell me what do you think about Russell’s opinion? Two very different requests…
I just spotted a flaw in your reasoning and notified you about it, it’s Ok to be flawed in your reasoning it’s part of being human, and I think Russell’s take is very flawed that you could see few flaws from the first watch…
I could have phrased my replies better that’s for sure, but I’m asking you to leave what you think of him out of your conclusion, because this was an interesting video to watch for me, and I think it could be fun for you to debunk some of the things he said… Not debunk him… :) ( the later is what you did, or tried to do… )
It’s been fun talking to you, hope I didn’t offend you when I said “you didn’t add anything to the conversation” that was pretty condescending… If I did then I apologize…
Actually, you said, and I quote, “what do you guys think about Russell Brand getting Baptised?”
It’s right at the top of the thread.
I told you what I thought and you didn’t accept it.
10/10 exquisite internet arguing
Don’t know what’s that supposed to mean, but thanks anyway
If you breach the sarcasm, it means that few people want to have meaningful discussions with people that unironically say pseudointellectual shit like this.
I’m beginning to understand why people use the block button… Good day