I thought this was already settled. There are MULTIPLE meanings
of the word DODGE/SIDESTEP and its perfectly reasonable
to read it as "the court failed to address the core issue".
End of debate.
The court could only fail to address the core issue, if that were their first responsibility.
Their first responsibility, or first step is to examine a case technically. Just like the hiring manager examines a resume, and decides to reject or accept at that stage.
The second responsibility is the examine the case on the "core" issues. Just like the hiring manager who accepts the resume represents a qualified applicant, he moves to the next phase, which is an examination of the "core" nature of the applicant.
You do not get to step two until you pass step one.
The case failed at step one, it was dismissed.
Since the case did not pass step one, they had no responsibility to address the "core" issue. Therefore, there was no failure to address the "core" issues.
So, to read it as a failure to address the "core" issues, is incorrect. To say it was a "dodge" or "duck" or "sidestep" is incorrect.
They succeeded in rejecting a technically weak case, they did not "dodge" "sidestep" nor "duck" the "core" issues of the case as you imply.
Case dismissed is all that happened.
And.....people who have their case dismissed are always reticent to be precise in the words they use.
of the word DODGE/SIDESTEP and its perfectly reasonable
to read it as "the court failed to address the core issue".
End of debate.
The court could only fail to address the core issue, if that were their first responsibility.
Their first responsibility, or first step is to examine a case technically. Just like the hiring manager examines a resume, and decides to reject or accept at that stage.
The second responsibility is the examine the case on the "core" issues. Just like the hiring manager who accepts the resume represents a qualified applicant, he moves to the next phase, which is an examination of the "core" nature of the applicant.
You do not get to step two until you pass step one.
The case failed at step one, it was dismissed.
Since the case did not pass step one, they had no responsibility to address the "core" issue. Therefore, there was no failure to address the "core" issues.
So, to read it as a failure to address the "core" issues, is incorrect. To say it was a "dodge" or "duck" or "sidestep" is incorrect.
They succeeded in rejecting a technically weak case, they did not "dodge" "sidestep" nor "duck" the "core" issues of the case as you imply.
Case dismissed is all that happened.
And.....people who have their case dismissed are always reticent to be precise in the words they use.
Quote from axeman:
It means what you read into it for you, and who knows what you are reading into a headline.
AAaaaaaaahhhh Optional finally ADMITS the word can
have several meanings!
ME reading into the headline! Thats laughable!!
Its CLEARLY YOU that is reading into the headline and
implying some kind of cheating...LOL
My read is the connotation of the word "duck" "dodge" "sidestep" as it is used typically, as it is being used in this context means abandon willingly a responsibility. Newspapers use language to inflame the readers, both pro and con. They use colorful language to sell papers, not dry and exact terms to avoid misunderstanding.
Their use of the word "duck" "dodge" or "sidestep" implies that the court did not fulfill their responsibility. It implies that they were unwilling to examine the issues, when in fact they were perfectly willing to hear the issues if the case were not technically flawed. Their duty is to reject such cases of technical flaw, they did their duty properly.
LOL.... now he can read the minds of the newspaper writers too!!
Wow ART... we already know you THINK you have magical powers
like communicating with god directly, but now you can read
these peoples minds too? Amazing...truly amazing! LMAOOOOO
The court did no such thing as "dodge" "duck" nor "sidestep." The court acted properly to "dismiss" and "reject" the case.
Blah blah blah....keep repeating that to yourself.
Whos the PARROT now? LOL!
I thought this was already settled. There are MULTIPLE meanings
of the word DODGE/SIDESTEP and its perfectly reasonable
to read it as "the court failed to address the core issue".
End of debate.
The member of the atheist cult you quoted is naturally pissed off, he would naturally choose the word "duck" or "dodge" feeling the court had a responsibility to hear the issues of the case, but he was wrong.
More Ad Hominem attacks. Cult? Thats pretty funny coming
from someone who claims to speak to god himself! LMAOOO
Surprising actually, that the atheist cult member would not be more reasonable and rational in his choice of words, and understand that what the court did was reasonable, rational, and proper given the circumstances.
Again...MULTIPLE sources CHOSE THE SAME WORDING.
YOU are the one with the problem reading to deeply and ASSUMING
you KNOW the true meaning of the words they chose.
I guess this is a very emotional issue for this cult group.
I think its clear who is emotional here.... you keep attacking
people with labels as CULT MEMBERS.....calm down ok?
I know it hurts when you're wrong...but really...its ok ART.
Now run off and go talk to god some more while you read
peoples minds...LMAOOOO
peace
axeman

