bump this thread whenever someone uses a logical fallacy

[Steven Soderburgin]

I fully expect to be the subject of a few posts in this thread.

But to start us off:

It's important because the Catholic Church is an organization with pretty significant international influence that openly wants to marginalize gays and women, peace

So does Islam, and they marginalize gays and women with a smile while they stone or behead them.

What international influence does the Catholic church have, aside from having world leaders that might follow that particular religion (and even they can make up their own minds about these things)? I don't really know of many countries that are governed under Catholic law outside the Vatican (Mexico?). I'd say you're barking up the wrong religion if you want to call out an organization that actually puts religious dogma into play as government law. *cough* *Saudi Arabia* *cough* middle east *cough*[/QUOTE]

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html

 

[Adam]

Try refuting the argument instead of using this passive-aggressive bullshit.

 

[Steven Soderburgin]

It's not actually an argument because it has nothing to do with the issue we were discussing (which is why it's a fallacy). But I did refute it in the thread by saying that I'm well aware of those issues he brought up and that it didn't have anything to do with what we're discussing (the Catholic Church's open bigotry and why it's cause for concern in developed, industrialized nations).

 

[Adam]

It's not actually an argument because it has nothing to do with the issue we were discussing (which is why it's a fallacy). But I did refute it in the thread by saying that I'm well aware of those issues he brought up and that it didn't have anything to do with what we're discussing (the Catholic Church's open bigotry and why it's cause for concern in developed, industrialized nations).

So, this is just a cry for more attention.

Gotcha. That's all you had to say

"Cry for attention"

 

[Steven Soderburgin]

It's not actually an argument because it has nothing to do with the issue we were discussing (which is why it's a fallacy). But I did refute it in the thread by saying that I'm well aware of those issues he brought up and that it didn't have anything to do with what we're discussing (the Catholic Church's open bigotry and why it's cause for concern in developed, industrialized nations).

So, this is just a cry for more attention.

Gotcha. That's all you had to say

"Cry for attention"[/QUOTE]

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

 

[Gusto]

*snrk*

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

hey adammon, have there been any good posts on free republic lately

 

[Adam]

hey adammon, have there been any good posts on free republic lately

Keeping up the stupidity, that's one bump for

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

 

[Gusto]

I love you, Flame Wars Subforum.

:hug:

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

no, I'm honestly curious, I try to go there as little as possible

 

[Steven Soderburgin]

hey adammon, have there been any good posts on free republic lately

Keeping up the stupidity, that's one bump for

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html[/QUOTE]

that's actually the wrong fallacy. You're looking for: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/guilt-by-association.html

 

[Adam]

hey adammon, have there been any good posts on free republic lately

Keeping up the stupidity, that's one bump for

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html[/QUOTE]

that's actually the wrong fallacy. You're looking for: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/guilt-by-association.html[/QUOTE]

True that.

 

[Steven Soderburgin]

Fuck, this thread is going to need to be bumped like every other fucking post, I can't keep this up on my own.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

Sorry man. You started it, you're gonna finish it. Dem's da rules.

 

[Chazwozel]

I fully expect to be the subject of a few posts in this thread.

But to start us off:

It's important because the Catholic Church is an organization with pretty significant international influence that openly wants to marginalize gays and women, peace

So does Islam, and they marginalize gays and women with a smile while they stone or behead them.

What international influence does the Catholic church have, aside from having world leaders that might follow that particular religion (and even they can make up their own minds about these things)? I don't really know of many countries that are governed under Catholic law outside the Vatican (Mexico?). I'd say you're barking up the wrong religion if you want to call out an organization that actually puts religious dogma into play as government law. *cough* *Saudi Arabia* *cough* middle east *cough*

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html[/QUOTE]

But I wasn't trying to divert the topic or "win" the argument... All I wanted to point out that there are bigger players contributing to marginalizing gays and women than the Catholic church. My interest was as to why you were calling them out as opposed to any other organization that tries to influence their doctrine on the masses. It's propaganda, not oppression. I want some sources on your claim that the Vatican dumps more money into lobbying against gay rights more so than any other religious institution.

Bully for you. You make shitty little passive aggressive threads to call out people. Why don't you just keep it in the original thread? Sorry if I don't agree with your scapegoat mentality.

 

[Steven Soderburgin]

I didn't actually claim that the Catholic Church puts more money than any other institution (strawman argument, I love it when people bump this thread for me), I did respond to you in the thread, and I'd go ahead and call this "aggressive" instead of "passive-aggressive." As for the "oppression vs. propaganda" thing, I'm just following their actions to their logical conclusion: the Catholic Church is using money and influence in order to affect policy so that a group of people remains second-class citizens outside of their institution as well as within it. As I said in the thread, I was calling out the Catholic Church specifically in this instance because they are using their open bigotry to lure people to the Church. When other institutions pull similar moves, I'll be sure to call them out, too.

 

[Chazwozel]

I didn't actually claim that the Catholic Church puts more money than any other institution, I did respond to you in the thread, and I'd go ahead and call this "aggressive" instead of "passive-aggressive." As I said in the thread, I was calling out the Catholic Church specifically in this instance because they are using their open bigotry to lure people to the Church. When other institutions pull similar moves, I'll be sure to call them out, too.

You're right! It's not entirely the Catholic Church! But a huge amount of money comes from the Church to support bans on gay marriage! And the Church is what we're talking about here!

How much money? Compare it to other anti-gay institutions fighting to keep yo rights down, yo.

Then we'll talk.

Otherwise, you're just 'calling out' the migration of bigots from one place to another, in which case I see no relevance in complaining about it. I hope you understand that I'm all for gay rights, but I also believe that a religious institution has the right to practice whatever doctrine they wish so long as it doesn't infringe on the governed rights of others. I don't see many Catholic social events with lynching gays on their agenda. Whether or not the Catholic church influences actual government marriage laws-- like you say it does-- isn't something I can back without significant evidence that a.) there is lots of money from the Vatican being diverted towards lobbyists b.) votes on these matters are being exclusively influenced by these lobby funds. c.) The Catholic church is doing this on a higher scale compared to any other institution. d.) the Catholic church is influencing public opinion on hiring public officials that are motivated by Catholic doctrine.

I was calling out the Catholic Church specifically in this instance because they are using their open bigotry to lure people to the Church.

I still don't see what this is hoping to accomplish. Religious institution promotes bigotry and intolerance of others...News at 11.

Face it bucko, your plight has no specific relevance in regard to the movement of bigots from one place to another, and you're trying to make it seem like it does. You realize this yourself, I'm sure, and the only way to get back at me is to start this piddly little thread to specifically put me on the spot i.e. passive-aggressive shit-boxing in the guise of one of Charlie's moronic "bump" threads.

 

[Steven Soderburgin]

You were just the first example I used when I decided to make this thread. I could've easily used GasBandit. As for what I hope to accomplish, it's just to remind people that the Catholic Church is doing this sort of thing. This is important as many in the Church want to promote the Church by spreading it's "good news" teachings, rather than having the Church be known for this sort of shit.

 

[Chazwozel]

You were just the first example I used when I decided to make this thread. I could've easily used GasBandit. As for what I hope to accomplish, it's just to remind people that the Catholic Church is doing this sort of thing. This is important as many in the Church want to promote the Church by spreading it's "good news" teachings, rather than having the Church be known for this sort of shit.

Fair enough...

 

[Steven Soderburgin]

also there's this

 

[Ross]

Everyone knows fast food is the best religion.

 

[fade]

I want to say something here: I know everyone thinks they are debate experts since that logic fallacy sheet made the email/forum circuit. But I do wish people would stop throwing out the term Straw Man every time they see an analogy. Granted, there's a blurry distinction between them, and they both rely on the same machinery, but analogy is perfectly acceptable as long as it validly represents the situation being discussed. Just because it defeats your argument, it's not necessarily a straw man.

Reminds me of Liar, Liar
"Objection!"
"On what grounds?"
"Because it's extremely damaging to my case!"

 

[Steven Soderburgin]

That's true, and it's a very fine line between reductio ad absurdum and a strawman. A strawman is when someone changes what the person they are debating with is actually arguing and responds to that argument instead of the actual case presented to them. We must be careful.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

man I don't know a FUCKING THING about a logical fallacy, I just spit hot fire.

 

[Krisken]

Everyone knows fast food is the best religion.

King Radical?

---------- Post added at 05:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:49 PM ----------

I want to say something here: I know everyone thinks they are debate experts since that logic fallacy sheet made the email/forum circuit. But I do wish people would stop throwing out the term Straw Man every time they see an analogy. Granted, there's a blurry distinction between them, and they both rely on the same machinery, but analogy is perfectly acceptable as long as it validly represents the situation being discussed. Just because it defeats your argument, it's not necessarily a straw man.

Reminds me of Liar, Liar
"Objection!"
"On what grounds?"
"Because it's extremely damaging to my case!"

Holy fucking christ, THIS.

 

[Jake]

This may be the first time I've seen the definition of a strawman used as a strawman. That's hella meta, yo.

 

[Shannow]

man I don't know a FUCKING THING about a logical fallacy, I just spit hot fire.

Dylon.


Dylon Dylon Dylon.