Should I accept this argument  PART 2?
415361
No, please always keep an open mind. Don't become a brainwashed lunatic.\n\nI like how mainworry's okay with it in part 1 but not part 2 : )
261292
definitely. see my response to your original question.\nhttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AmbLdvdlwtHb3rjGm3Id6HPsy6IX?qid=1006030800539
536543
Understand that some of these answers may be offensive to some people.\n\nI'll go with answer D.
72560
Sure why not.  By the way PP, you contradicted yourself in your answer.
558132
You have a good argument, and just maybe....
590080
not prove - but offer a rationale. Same with statistics. Like Humpty Dumpty said i nWonderland " I pay the words, so they mean whatever I want them to mean."
965072
Of course not.  You have the right to state your opinion.  Anyway, who cares?  You are taking care of your business, right?  Remember, never argue with an idiot.  If he wants to argue with you, point out your avatar at the top of the page that says "best answerer."
691118
NO!! and I like your statements. The trouble is, you have to\nwatch what you say on Yahoo questions & Answers. You might\nOFFEND someone.
10622
You should not assume it... you should look at any sources provided by me. Also... you have the wonderful tool of "common sense" available to you to see if answers are reasonable or not.
749633
Here is my evaluation based on logic\nArgument 1 Creation.\nPremise 1: true\nPremise 2: true\nPremise 3: true\nConclusion: logically flows from premises 1 to 3, so valid.\n\nArgument 2 Evolution.\nPremise 1: true\nPremise 2: true\nPremise 3: true if that site's proofs are true.\n\nConclusion: logically flows from premise 1 to 3 ( except you have to add the words: "and many are fascinated by evolution); so yes, your conclusion is Valid. \n\nBoy, you must be good in your logic class!
831656
Some people just use this as an example to prove their point.  It wouldn't hurt to get a second opinion if you are that concerned.  I usually do just to make sure.
354764
If you can prove I am wrong, then I would clearly have to reconsider my position on the matter!\n\nBut, that is impossible to do at the current moment in time - the best you can hope for is that advancements in human understanding allow you to be successful in the future (which, clearly, I very much doubt will occur)
503041
"Think about it, you have to acknowledge that there is a god (higher power) for you not to believe in, right? In that case, wouldn't you be agnostic?"\nTHAT MAKES NO SENSE, SHOULD I SAY: I DON'T BELIEVE THAT GOD EXISTS, IS THAT BETTER?
1037890
No ..\n\nwait .. yes ....\n\nwell .. no to the first part and yes to the second.\n\n:-)
515690
this is a controversial subject. there are arguments on both sides
546098
Why are you trying to impose the belief on me that there is something wrong with the statement the other person made?  It is natural to share opinions.  You just need to accept some and let others go.
706581
It sounds fallacious to me.  It's non-sequitor (it doesn't logically follow) and slippery slope (it over-exaggerates the consequences).  Maybe you could find support if you change your argument to something else like, "if we start selling condoms in high schools more people will have sex." or "if we start selling condoms in high schools then the students will have less STDs."