Who's character is being attacked? You might not like the staement but it is not an attack on charcter rather than answering the argument?

I agree the government can't even handle itself let alone that responsibility. I just figured since we were on the subject of the government wanting us to procreate.......

I realize "nature" is not a thing, but I do believe that evolution and adaptation works in ways we do not understand.

__________________
1982 300SD 180K, rebuilt engine
1973 450SLC Megasquirt
1990 Volvo 780 - 273k
1993 Volvo 240 Wagon - Scrap yard slumber

http://www.fuelly.com/sig-us/44619.png

You stated outright that any "liberal" who does not think like you is mentally retarded.

__________________
1982 300SD 180K, rebuilt engine
1973 450SLC Megasquirt
1990 Volvo 780 - 273k
1993 Volvo 240 Wagon - Scrap yard slumber

http://www.fuelly.com/sig-us/44619.png

Margaret Sanger, Marie Stopes, H. G. Wells, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, Emile Zola, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, John Harvey Kellogg, Linus Pauling and Sidney Webb.

My opinions about liberals are irrelavant, I've provide the operative definition for you I'll do so again:

An ad-hominem argument attacks an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

Adolf Hitler.

You mean like making insulting remarks about a two other poster's sexual preference? You mean like that? Next subject..... hypocrisy....

No victim, just pointing out the false claim.

If they are irrelevent then why did you bring them up in the first place? It is still an attack no matter how you rationalize it.

__________________
1982 300SD 180K, rebuilt engine
1973 450SLC Megasquirt
1990 Volvo 780 - 273k
1993 Volvo 240 Wagon - Scrap yard slumber

http://www.fuelly.com/sig-us/44619.png

I think I mentioned that at one point. It somehow was ignored

__________________
1982 300SD 180K, rebuilt engine
1973 450SLC Megasquirt
1990 Volvo 780 - 273k
1993 Volvo 240 Wagon - Scrap yard slumber

http://www.fuelly.com/sig-us/44619.png

With nothing of value to the topic being contributed, this thread is now a mere exchange of mud. Time to move on to the next . . .

Of all people I would have expected you to refrain from offering a critique of alleged insults directed towards others. Have you no shame?



An ad-hominem argument attacks an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

My comment about ad hominem attacks was not intended to describe your previous comment, rather was a general observation of your debating technique. When your argument gets punched full of holes, you typically fall back to -
1. Straw man (usually something to do with liberals)
2. Ad hominem

Sorry if you interpreted my remark as being directly related to your latest post.

__________________
On some nights I still believe that a car with the fuel gauge on empty can run about fifty more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. - HST

1983 300SD - 305000
1984 Toyota Landcruiser - 190000
1994 GMC Jimmy - 203000

https://media.giphy.com/media/X3nnss8PAj5aU/giphy.gif

I agree. Since the resident homophobes refuse to offer any valid compelling reason for the state to interfere in two people entering into a legal contract, the discussion has ended in their defeat. Mud is what is at the bottom of the barrel of ideas they are currently scraping.

Oh, so now I am your straw man ? Man up, dude. Goodbye.