Conservatives Give Gay Wedding Guidance

reply to post by bokonon2010


Goatina's sexier than some of the human women around here.

You wouldn't happen to know if she has a single sister?

reply to post by bokonon2010


It would be funny if was not so sad, you obviously don't know what "ad hominem" means if you think someone calling your homopobic post homophobic constitutes an "ad hominem" attack.

The "Ad Hominem Fallacy" fallacy

One of the most widely misused terms on the Net is "ad hominem". It is most often introduced into a discussion by certain delicate types, delicate of personality and mind, whenever their opponents resort to a bit of sarcasm. As soon as the suspicion of an insult appears, they summon the angels of ad hominem to smite down their foes, before ascending to argument heaven in a blaze of sanctimonious glory. They may not have much up top, but by God, they don't need it when they've got ad hominem on their side. It's the secret weapon that delivers them from any argument unscathed.

Actual instances of argumentum ad hominem are relatively rare. Ironically, the fallacy is most often committed by those who accuse their opponents of ad hominem, since they try to dismiss the opposition not by engaging with their arguments, but by claiming that they resort to personal attacks. Those who are quick to squeal "ad hominem" are often guilty of several other logical fallacies, including one of the worst of all: the fallacious belief that introducing an impressive-sounding Latin term somehow gives one the decisive edge in an argument.

Your claim that pointing out that your post and actions are homophobic are not an "ad hominem" attack, claiming so just makes you look foolish.

your post IS homophobic, and ridiculous to boot. claiming legalizing gay marriage will lead to people marrying animals, or inanimate objects is desperately grasping at straws.

Legal gay marriage has been a reality for some time now in Canada, and several other countries, and there have been no instances of anyone marrying a goat, or toaster yet.

Your arguments sound like poorly recorded re-plays of the same arguments used in the 50's and 60's against inter-racial marriage.

reply to post by RyanFromCan


I don't know about you, but just reading this article has me thinking about gay marriage, marrying animals and inanimate objects.

Not that I'd ever do it, you understand...

Just thinking about it.

reply to post by RyanFromCan

Behavioral scientists William O'Donohue and Christine Caselles state that "as homophobia is usually used, makes an illegitimately pejorative evaluation of certain open and debatable value positions, much like the former disease construct of homosexuality" itself, arguing that the term may be used as an ad hominem argument against those who advocate values or positions of which the user does not approve.

^ O'Donohue, William; Caselles, Christine (September 1993). "Homophobia: Conceptual, definitional, and value issues". J Psychopathol Behav Assess 15 (3).

William T. "Bill" O'Donohue (born August 18, 1957) is an American psychologist who focuses on human sexuality, especially child sexual abuse. In 2009 O'Donohue was appointed as advisor to the DSM-V Work Group on Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association.

en.wikipedia.org...

Are you trying to argue with the advisor to DSM-V ?- good luck.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by bokonon2010

 

I think you have the wrong forum??
Where are your fifty personal words concerning the headline??
Why did you post this?

Thank you Mr./Ms. Junior policeman, did you rat on other kids in school?

Originally posted by CaptainLJB
reply to post by bokonon2010

 

Goatina's sexier than some of the human women around here.

You wouldn't happen to know if she has a single sister?

Hey! Stick to the topic buddy or some junior G-man ( oops sorry) G-Person will complain on you. And ahem, on to the topic, well I do think that Conservatives are perfectly competent to provide wedding guidance be it a Gay wedding or an un-Gay wedding.