TREASON!

[Hobbes' Choice]

I believe ad hominems are the refuge of a weak mind with a weak argument.

Those who do not know the difference between an ad hominem and an insult are not qualified to make that opinion.

[thedoc]

What does calling the other person an Idiot, have to do with the topic. Attacking the other person, rather than the topic is close enough to an ad hominem to qualify.

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

Again, you forget that I am Bob the Baptist, the new guru, the modern messiah, the wizard of Ouzo, and a divinely inspired prophet of all things spiritual, political and economic. Now you might ask how I know this for a God-given fact. Well, if you add up the seven churches (the seven continents of the world from a spiritual standpoint) in Chapters 2 & 3 of the book of Revelation, in English gematria simplex (A=1 to Z=26), and subtract out "the seven continents of the world" from a physical standpoint, you are left with the spiritual essence of my name, "Robert Merlin Evenson," which also adds up to the Unholy Trinity of Satan, False Prophet and Beast.

LOLworthy post.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ElUBr6-GLU

[bobevenson]

Now do I really seem like the kind of person who would be interested in a 'conservative christian organisation'?? You might as well post correspondence from the local lunatic asylum.

You don't really seem to be the kind of person who would be interested, but I submit that you are doing the lunatics a disservice by comparing them to Bob. A lunatic might be crazy, but they are not necessarily stupid.

Of course, Doc, in your case, I don't know if you're crazy, stupid or both.

[bobevenson]

Attacking the other person, rather than the topic is close enough to an ad hominem to qualify.

Sorry, close only counts in hand grenades and horseshoes.

[Hobbes' Choice]

What does calling the other person an Idiot, have to do with the topic. Attacking the other person, rather than the topic is close enough to an ad hominem to qualify.

Why don't you look it up first?

[thedoc]

Now do I really seem like the kind of person who would be interested in a 'conservative christian organisation'?? You might as well post correspondence from the local lunatic asylum.

You don't really seem to be the kind of person who would be interested, but I submit that you are doing the lunatics a disservice by comparing them to Bob. A lunatic might be crazy, but they are not necessarily stupid.

Of course, Doc, in your case, I don't know if you're crazy, stupid or both.

Can I add that to my resume?

[thedoc]

What does calling the other person an Idiot, have to do with the topic. Attacking the other person, rather than the topic is close enough to an ad hominem to qualify.

Why don't you look it up first?

I did.

[SpheresOfBalance]

What does calling the other person an Idiot, have to do with the topic. Attacking the other person, rather than the topic is close enough to an ad hominem to qualify.

Why don't you look it up first?

While I'm sure those with really screwed up characters, would love one not resorting to ad hominem, I would say that their screwed up argument is a direct reflection of their screwed up character. That in fact they are one in the same problem. I mean, do you really expect one that's clinically brain dead to come up with a sound argument? And that one should actually entertain their slop, instead of calling a spade a spade, "Hey you're brain dead, an idiot, that made no sense." Brain dead equating to idiot of course, by definition it seems to rest on IQ. Sure you can have empathy for their condition, but truth reigns supreme, so says philosophy. Isn't the method in which one dispenses with the brain dead argument subjective. Isn't it sometimes best to nip the cancer in the bud rapidly, before it spreads to healthy tissue? Of course being brain dead is just one extreme along a continuously variable gradient. I have seen many nearly brain dead, here and there.

Yet we're all equal in potential, in moment one. Baring any physical abnormalities of course. After that it's either clear sailing with ever favorable winds, or the never ending labyrinth of confusion thrown at you. Then how can one equally measure another? As soon as one says there is inequality amongst men they make it so! While the opposite is also true. So it's not the person their initial selves, that's nearly brain dead, rather that person they've, for what ever reason, become, that is such, and then so is their argument, one in the same thing.

Actually I agree that one should only address the argument at hand, leaving condescension, demeaning attitude, and their prejudice, especially via name calling, at home in their closet, where it belongs.

[Hobbes' Choice]

What does calling the other person an Idiot, have to do with the topic. Attacking the other person, rather than the topic is close enough to an ad hominem to qualify.

Why don't you look it up first?

I did.

You did, but failed to understand it.

[henry quirk]

"I've noticed this about you yanks. Everyone who isn't a right-wing fascist shit-head is automatically a commie bastard."

That may be the case, but: I'm not just any yank, and I'm not assessing just any person.

Bill is a leftist communitarian (not synonymous with communist).

#

"Does it not occur to you that not everyone fits your neat, and extremely narrow labels?"

Sure, but I'm not talkin' about 'everyone', just Bill (a leftist communitarian [not communist]).

#

"Bill can be an annoying SOB but at least he seems to think things through (and think about things in general) far more than the average yank."

HA!

I disagree.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



Go on...




.

[henry quirk]

'nuff said.

[thedoc]

Why don't you look it up first?

I did.

You did, but failed to understand it.

Really? You wanted me to understand it as well? Why didn't you say so, you just said to look it up.

[henry quirk]

HA!