these three considerations are self-evident, and are henceforth corollary to the healthcare reform debate:


1- the integrity of obama and his intentions are forthright.

2- "life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness" implies no-cost access to the most basic facilities of life-sustainment. universal health care falls into this category.

3- the sources of the information upon which your argument is based are truthful and independently verifiable.

______

if you do not accept these terms, then you are, respectively:


1- an obama hater.

2- inhuman.

3- a dimwit.

______
further notes, respectively:


1- i appreciate the difficulty of this statement, but in order for us to get anywhere in this debate it is necessary to at least BEGIN from this position. if you believe that, or it is later proven that, obama is a liar and a theif, you must state this from the outset. (it would probably be better for you to use another forum, as the integrity of the president is a seperate issue, altogether.)

2- only the specifics of implementation are up for debate. as a pure ideology, universal healthcare is unquestionable.

3- in general: people that cannot control the tone of their voice, including talk show hosts, certain town hall attendees, and the MSM at large, should be discluded as valid sources. please be sure to check all footnotes.

______


clarify your argument: once you have cleared these three rules, then and ONLY then are you ready to put forward your argument.

please feel free to refer any breaches of these rules back to this thread citing, "please see rule #1", etc.

[edit on 21-8-2009 by tgidkp]

Someone actually flagged this thread?

Um, no offense, but I am not getting what your point is with this thread. Are you stating that you are in favor of universal health care and anyone who is not is an obama hater, inhuman, or a dimwit?

it is my only intent to clear the debate forum of what i consider to be a dangerous (read: potentially causing literal harm to another person) trend. in my personal observations anytime the debate breaks down, and people start bringing out their hand-guns, one of these three rules has been broken.

if you wish to question the legitimacy of these logics, then please do. but i assure you that they are solid.