Quote:
Originally Posted by Propianotuner1
Here's the glaringly obvious reasons I am guilty of neither argument:
In order to be guilty of argumentum ad hominem, one must be presenting an argument in the first place. What I did to Hammer rather than present an argument, was casually dismiss his notion. To be blunt, I don't consider it worth my time arguing against such a pre-Copernican claim. Hence, you were arguing against a non-argument and as such I can't meet the criteria for a tu quoque fallacy. You can't use an indirect red herring after all if you weren't even presenting an argument in the first place.
What I was referring to, as opposed to your apt but fundamentally misguided assumptions, was hypocrisy. I have a litany of ad homs slung against me by several members and I get charged with it for what was clearly a casual dismissal? Your condescension and critique of my reasoning abilities only demonstrates your own vanity, not some righteous crusade.
|
You have a generally unpleasant demeanor, mister. In the face of our earnest, well-intentioned rebukes, you do exactly the opposite of what a True Christian should do; instead of showing gratitude for our attempts to save you from an eternity of agonizing sodomy in the pits of hell, you strike vexatiously at us, using Baby Jesus as a proxy, and vomit your acrid, bloody, mucus-infused bile directly onto His rosy cheeked, tear streaked countenance! Then you start whining and flapping your hands like some kind of retard, accusing us of "ad hominem"(which sounds pretty gay) attacks against
you!
You know, every time you twist scripture for your own perverse gratification, it increases the girth of satan's constantly burdgeoning erection....do you want to be even marginally responsible for the many trillions of rectums that will be torn asunder by that pulsating monstrosity?
