AJ Philips:

If you are not doing anything wrong then why have you gone to so much trouble to justify that you are not doing anything wrong? You are answerable to no one here. Is this another argument that you have no need to be involved in?

That is two arguments which you have entered into without good reason. Where there is no good reason there must be a bad one. Using the forums to try and shore up your own personal insecurities is an abuse of the forums. If that is not what you are doing then you will have no need to defend yourself a third time.

Phanto,

You really need to quit with the amateur psychoanalysis. You’re not good at it.

<<If you are not doing anything wrong then why have you gone to so much trouble to justify that you are not doing anything wrong?

Because you have suggested that I am.

You have said that you think I’m wasting my time. I have responded by stating why I don’t think I am. It’s that simple.

<<That is two arguments which you have entered into without good reason.>>

You have not demonstrated that yet. Again, all you’ve done is continue to ask what the point is in arguing a point that most people agree with me on, and assert that there is no point. That doesn’t address anything I’ve said. A contradiction is not an argument.

<<Where there is no good reason there must be a bad one.>>

Well there’s a false dichotomy if I ever saw one. Did it ever occur to you that there could be varying degrees of good and bad reasons with neutral reasons that are neither good nor bad in the middle? And even if they were bad reasons, that doesn’t suggest any insincerity or anything sinister on my behalf. All it would suggest is that I was unaware that I was wasting my time.

<<If that is not what you are doing then you will have no need to defend yourself a third time.>>

Did it ever occur to you that I may just want to defend my reasons for debating as reasons that I see as having merit? Your posts are filled with false dichotomies.

Again though, this is just the argumentum ad hominem fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem). Even if you were right, it would say nothing about the strength of my arguments. For some reason you just feel the need to play the man and not the ball now, and each time I defend myself, you then use that to make even more slanderous suggestions.

If you think you have an argument against same-sex marriage that isn’t actually fallacious, then let’s hear it. Otherwise, go and annoy someone else.

//Down's syndrome is a defect of nature therefor Down's syndrome people are defective in varying degree.//

According to my dictionary, 'defective' means "imperfect or faulty".

If Down's syndrome people are imperfect, and can be conclusively be determined to be imperfect then it follows that:
a) There must be some objective benchmark for human perfection
AND
b) You must have knowledge of what it is.
Otherwise, how could you make a conclusive determination that people with Down's syndrome are imperfect?

So spill: what are the characteristics of a a perfect person? Is the perfect person anything along the lines of the Ubermensch of Nietzscheian philosophy?

As for the idea that people with Down's syndrome are faulty: let he that is without fault cast the first stone.

//So you think an ad hominem wins the argument?//

That wasn't an ad hominem fallacy, you moral degenerate. That was just me expressing contempt for your offensively unpleasant remark about people with Down's syndrome.

Calling people with Down's syndrome 'defective' isn't going to help you win the argument. It's not big and it's not clever, and arguing the way Is Mise and yourself argued in the last few posts can only serve to undermine any convincing arguments your side might offer.

It's not just weak logic, it's appalling rhetoric and Is Mise should know better even if you don't.

//Regarding your tongue argument...at least its not found in the most grubbiest of holes.//

Most grubbiest of holes? Every time you write a sentence like that God kills a grammar teacher.

I don't know where the most grubby hole is located, nor the grubbiest of holes. I don't even know how one measures 'grubbiness', quantitatively or qualitatively. But my candidate for the grubbiest hole would be in a tailings dam somewhere. You'd be unlikely to find anybody's tongue there, because they would rapidly dissolve in the very low pH environment.

Toni,

"People with Down syndrome have:

some characteristic physical features
some health and development challenges
some level of intellectual disability.
Because no two people are alike, each of these things will vary from one person to another."
http://www.downsyndrome.org.au/what_is_down_syndrome.html

these are defects as in:
"defect
noun
....
a shortcoming, imperfection, or lack.
"genetic defects"
synonyms: fault, flaw, imperfection, deficiency, weakness, weak spot/point, inadequacy, shortcoming, limitation, failing, obstruction"
https://www.google.com.au/?gws_rd=ssl#q=defect
Down's syndrome persons suffer from defects and are therefore defective.
My first cousin on my father's side had Down's syndrome and my parent's and to a lesser extent I, looked after him from the age of five until he died at seven years, and believe me he was defective in comparison to all the other children that I knew.
He was a delightful little human being but he suffered from genetic defects, and therefore he was defective.

@Toni Lavis

"If Down's syndrome people are imperfect, and can be conclusively be determined to be imperfect then it follows that:
a) There must be some objective benchmark for human perfection
AND
b) You must have knowledge of what it is.
Otherwise, how could you make a conclusive determination that people with Down's syndrome are imperfect?"

Yes there is an objective benchmark and I have knowledge of it. You obviously don't. The benchmark is 46 chromosomes.

//Yes there is an objective benchmark and I have knowledge of it. You obviously don't. The benchmark is 46 chromosomes.//

You consider this the pinnacle of human pefection?

http://cdn2.arkive.org/media/AB/AB626C28-396D-4FA6-B1F4-EAA38932E818/Presentation.Large/Male-Reeves-muntjac-.jpg

Tories say the darndest things.