Reply #36: Suppose I say I haven't seen adequate proof that: [View All]

Sarah Palin isn't an alien from the planet Dumphuq.

Barack Obama doesn't have blue tights with a big red "S" on his chest under that suit.

Michelle Bachmann isn't a succubus from hell.

Now, you can't prove I'm wrong, can you? One cannot prove a negative. I can't prove I'm not a monster; does that make me a monster? Can you prove you're not a subversive Republican plant? Hmm?

No one can possibly prove a negative, so requiring one in argument is unfair. Requiring someone to prove a negative to make a judgment call leads to bad judgments, because you're abandoning logic. It is, literally, putting the burden of proof on the defense; it is manifestly unfair.

Do you have actual statistics or merely a collection of news stories? Even if you do have statistics, how does that prove the breed is the problem, when it is clear that some people are breeding these dogs to be savage?