Quote:
Originally posted by theking
Since you seem to like fictional scenarios here is mine.
There are three boys...one named Bush...one named Congress...one named America. One of the houses in the neigborhood has a Cherry tree in the back yard. The Cherries look especially ripe and appetizing. The boy named Bush goes to the boy named Congress and convinces Congress to help him pick the Cherries from the tree. Congress agrees that is a good idea but they will need someone to help them both as they cannot reach the Cherries. Bush and Congress go to their friend America and tell him they want to pick the Cherries but they will need some help and they convince America to help. Congress gets ontop of his friend America's shoulders and Bush gets ontop of Congress's shoulders and begins to pick the Cherries. The owner of the Cherry tree spots the boys in the back yard picking his Cherries and goes running out. He tells Bush and Congress I blame you for stealing my Cherries but to America he says "well you were just supporting them on your shoulders so they could steal my Cherries" so you are without blame and can go home now, but these other two boys will know my wrath.
|
Let's suppose that Bush and Congress want the cherries because they taste so fucking good and they are gonna selfishly eat them. But they tell America that they need them because Cherry tree owner has hired those 2 boys to pick the Cherries.
Cherry tree owner catches those three boys and after questioning them all he finds out that America acted in really good intention, while Bush's and Congress's intentions were bad. Cherry tree owner understands that America wasn't capable of finding out the real motives of Bush and Congress, and since his intentions were of good nature, he certainly does not blame America.
Besides, correct argumentation would require that you refute another persons argument and then maybe make your own.
But I liked the story
