aneeshm
Deity
This is thread 07 in the Devil's Advocate line of threads.
In these threads, all posters have to take exactly the opposite stance to the ones they usually take. Thus, for example, I will defend Shariah law and defend the legal "rights" of Muslims to take four wives if they want. And I'll do it sincerely, not satirically.
Note that things used here cannot be used against you in normal forum debates except in other DA debates.
The other rules and list of topics are given here: Let's play Devil's Advocate!.
Please be sure to read the rules - they're the distilled wisdom collected over all the DA threads till now.
In this DA thread, we discuss Ron Paul. His supporters claim that he is the best hope America has today to get out of the mess many people, irrespective of political affiliation, say she is in. Some of his policies, however, are very bitterly criticised by his opponents on both sides of the political spectrum.
Whatever your opinion of him is, in this thread, you have to argue for a logically coherent opposite. I know, it seems completely impossible that anything that is in opposition to your opinion can conceivably be logically coherent. But we are here to gain insight into how the other side thinks we think, so give it your best shot.
To be fair to the good doctor, let's begin this, too with a nice little picture:

In these threads, all posters have to take exactly the opposite stance to the ones they usually take. Thus, for example, I will defend Shariah law and defend the legal "rights" of Muslims to take four wives if they want. And I'll do it sincerely, not satirically.
Note that things used here cannot be used against you in normal forum debates except in other DA debates.
The other rules and list of topics are given here: Let's play Devil's Advocate!.
Please be sure to read the rules - they're the distilled wisdom collected over all the DA threads till now.
In this DA thread, we discuss Ron Paul. His supporters claim that he is the best hope America has today to get out of the mess many people, irrespective of political affiliation, say she is in. Some of his policies, however, are very bitterly criticised by his opponents on both sides of the political spectrum.
Whatever your opinion of him is, in this thread, you have to argue for a logically coherent opposite. I know, it seems completely impossible that anything that is in opposition to your opinion can conceivably be logically coherent. But we are here to gain insight into how the other side thinks we think, so give it your best shot.
To be fair to the good doctor, let's begin this, too with a nice little picture:

