Another one I run into regularly seems to be a category of argument from consequences or force, and it's similar to Pascal's Wager (sometimes it IS Pascal's Wager): when the person cites the consequences of not believing their claim and also refers to how little the cost is to you to believe it in comparison to the cost of not believing it if you're wrong.
I've got 50 million dollars of werewolf insurance for you and it's just $5 a month...how can you afford NOT to buy that just in case?
I've got 50 million dollars of werewolf insurance for you and it's just $5 a month...how can you afford NOT to buy that just in case?
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.