yguy

No, it means you were merely repeating what others said, so I ignored it.

JamesKrieger

So I guess that means that you agree with the fact that you committed the fallacy of presupposition?

yguy

Perhaps you could benefit from reviewing this section of the IIDB rules:

(2) You will not post material that is knowingly defamatory, illegal, abusive, threatening, harassing, or racially offensive. As with anything, you will use good common sense. In other words, you agree not to be a jerk.

JamesKrieger

My statement was not defamatory.

It was not illegal.

It was not abusive.

It was not threatening.

It was not harrassing.

It was not racially offensive.

Pointing out a logical fallacy (the fallacy of presupposition, in your case), and using your own fallacy against your reasoning, is none of these, and is quite allowed on these boards.

yguy

Indeed, it was none of those things. It was, however, decidedly less than intelligent, and I'll be damned if I'll waste my time with such drivel.

JamesKrieger

Pointing out a logical fallacy is actually quite intelligent. It is an example of good critical thinking. Pointing out the absurdity in this fallacy, by using the same reasoning, is also intelligent, because it shows that the person doing the criticizing understands what is meant by the fallacy.

If you don't want to waste your time with such drivel, why did you even bother with the above response? Or are you saying that you don't want to waste your time actually addressing a fallacy in your argument?

Calzaer

I'll give you three guesses.

Fr.Andrew

(Fr Andrew): But the disabled individual is an adult. You said that you would view "any sexual relationship of a child not old enough to drive with an adult as probable abuse."
I gave an example which forced you to realize that there may be circumstances under which such behaviour would not be abusive. That's my only agenda in this...getting people to open their minds a bit and think outside the box. Perhaps reduce the cloud of ignorance and hysteria surrounding a difficult subject.

There are other examples. In fact, according to the study that I posted, 53% of the men and 36% of the women polled, who had experienced sexual contact with an adult when they were 16 or younger, either feel no effect from it at all, or feel that it was a positive experience.
These are not "hypothetical extremities". These are real people--many of whom no doubt live their lives consumed with guilt and shame--thinking that there must be something terribly wrong with them--because they don't feel "abused" the way society says they should.

(Fr Andrew): You talked me into it! I'll take the dogs for a walk. We could use the exercise.

yguy

Ahh, you mean to enlighten us, to broaden our perspectives.

You and NAMBLA, huh?

yguy

You don't understand my argument well enough to find fault with it - and you don't want to, either.