A Case of Reasoned Discourse ….

…has broken out on the blog Eideard — seems the blogger couldn’t stand a few questions about the Children’s Defense Fund Report calling 19 and 20 year old adults “children”.

Yesterday I was checking new activity through WordPress — they have a nifty feature that pulls up random blogs based on a topic selected. I picked firearms and decided to check out the blog and the numbers. (Emphasis below mine)

 

That’s just a more dramatic way of stating an already staggering figure – 2,694 in 2010. Most of the report’s 73 following pages are devoted to restating it…

Knowing how likely anti-rights cultists and groups are likely to twist, distort or out right lie; I pulled up the numbers from the CDC Wisqars program for 2010. Visitors have to enter the data and submit themselves, can’t save a search or report unfortunately.

f a person was to go by the legal definition of a child “under 18” – CDC reports 1,337; less than 50% of the number claimed by the Children’s Defense Fund. And that is all reasons; suicides, homicides, legal interventions, and accidents.  (Click on any image for the full sized version)

In order to come close to the numbers claimed by the CDF; ‘children’ as old as 19 have to be included –2,711.

And left a comment. It was responded to by someone not “Eideard” . Note the 3:06 P.M. time

 

 

And I had selected to be notified by email if someone replied — as you can clearly see someone did.

I posted responses to the reply; simply stating that I wonder why anti-rights cultists needed to lie about the numbers and asking if they lie about something so basic, so easily verified, what honor or integrity do they have regarding anything else. Note the 5:10 P.M. Time.

 

 

There were two or three rounds of comments made and the last one seemed to have touched a nerve. I asked if we are going to consider under 21 as “children” in this area; should we restrict their rights in others?

Should they be allowed to vote, sign contracts, have abortions. See I really don’t understand how the “medical community” can support the idea that “under 21 is a child” but support 15 to 16 year olds having access to the “Plan B” or “Morning After Pills” or full abortions without parental notification and approval.

 

 

It isn’t amazing how some People (*** cough *** Joan Peterson** cough **) keep calling for us to have a discussion but so many on the anti-rights side don’t allow comments to stick around?

 

Of course who ever deleted the comments was very clumsy about it –makes it seems as if “Moss” is talking to his or herself.

 

Although I promise I was not rude, crude or socially unacceptable in any manner; my comments were scrubbed clean. Maybe someone else could have better luck over there…have fun if you want but please be polite.

Until then I’ll end with the Question to the Antis — I’m ready to have the discussion, why aren’t you?

 

 Please join the discussion.

 

 

4 Responses to this post.

  1. Posted by harp1034 on 13.09.13 at 13:50

    Since they don’t want the children to get shot then no one under 21 should be allowed to be in the armed forces.

  2. Posted by lumpy on 13.09.13 at 13:50

    Comments are now closed. Thats a shocker

  3. Posted by SinEater on 13.09.13 at 13:50

    I did a quick scan through a number of their articles. Virtually none have comments. Either this is a self-serving liberal blog that is only there to give some wienie credibility as a blogger or they simply
    “can’t handle the truth” as the saying goes.

  4. Posted by Bob S. on 13.09.13 at 13:50

    Harp1034,

    Great point ! And 21 and under should forget that Law Enforcement Career also.

    Lumpy,

    Yep, comments were closed after comment by Eideard; something to the effect that half my comments generated a 405 error. Made Eideard think I was a “spammer” — wonder how many spammers make comments that are on topic, follow up other comments and actually LINK back to the site with a valid pingback / link. Maybe Eideard defines spammer as anyone who disagrees.

    SinEater,

    I looked through the comments also, noticed the same thing. I’m leaning toward “can’t handle the truth” myself but self-serving is possible. Definitely a case of “Reasoned Discourse” in short order.