On Fri, 24 May 2013, Tim Josling <tim.josling@gmail.com> wrote:
This discussion would be good fodder for a case study in logically invalid arguments.
E.g.
Labelling: that argument is "extreme"
Meaningless assertions with no evidence: the ABC is "right wing".
It's interesting that you make a claim of assertions with no evidence while not even bothering to quote the previous discussion that you refer to. http://www.theage.com.au/business/study-finds-abc-bias-leans-towards- coalition-20090902-f8gm.html Above is the URL which was previously cited suggesting that the ABC TV has a right-wing bias.
Ad hominem: "Is there no woman at all who you care about?" http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by+Subject/4125.0~Jan+2012~M ain+Features~Life+expectancy~3110
When someone specifically states that they don't want women's and children's hospitals because they won't personally use them then it is a clear example of being heartless. The fact that women are likely to live longer isn't the issue. The issue is whether women have health issues that men don't have in large enough numbers to justify a separate hospital. Enough women give birth to satisfy those criteria. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/