Depending on the meaning of the word "a," then I am guilty as charged. :idunno:
I felt as though this needed additional commentary:
What really irks me about the liberal crowd is that what I am saying is being painted as something other than what I am saying. Yes, it is true that I asserted that a husband should have beaten his wife until she was dead, with the following qualifications:
1. That the word "a" signifies a particular case, not a general rule.
2. That he would have done so only assuming that the law would have permitted it. My assertion could take the form of a counterfactual: "Granted that the laws were different, so and so is the case."
3. That the beating in question would have been in punishment for what, under my hypothesis, would have been considered a criminal and gravely unjust act or set of acts.
And frankly, it wouldn't irk me so much if it weren't so common, especially on this site, and especially among liberals. It's not just what I said. It's not just the so called "apology for rape."
It's broader than that. There's virtually no attempt to understand what it is that's being said by the other party. Misrepresentation is running rampant. And frankly, I think that it's this sheer misrepresentation and refusal even to try to understand what people are saying that's driving the animosity and division here on TOL (and, to an extent, probably in American politics at large).
How many times does Arthur Brain, Rusha, etc. expect to repeat the falsehood that Ok_Dozer categorically thinks that rape is categorically/universally justified, that women deserve to be raped (in the precise sense that it is just for the assailant to commit the rape(s) in question) and that women are, in effect, fully and solely to blame for being raped...how many times do you expect to repeat this before Ok_Dozer just starts calling you retards and trolling you?
I wouldn't do it, of course. I don't even necessarily agree with it. But I can understand why he does it. What you are doing is just positively infuriating.
If you want to disagree with me, that's fine. I don't expect people simply to mindlessly accept every word that I say, with or without arguments on my part.
But the least that I expect is that, if you disagree with me, you are disagreeing with what I actually expressed, not what I
didn't say.