Banning the Burqa?

[Jinkies]

Ignoring the false analogy fallacy

Could you point this out? You keep calling me on using fallacies, and you keep being absolutely full of shit. I'm honestly interested in knowing what you considered a false analogy and why.

---

Your comparison with wife beating just doesn't compare, unless of course the beating is requested (and there are plenty of healthy relationships where it is, believe me). Context is important. I don't have anything against someone smoking crack either; as long as the only person you are harming is yourself.

I did not compare wearing a burqa to beating your wife, which I'm not saying you do (or don't do, I don't know you). I was listing stupid things people do. Two things are not necessarily being compared simply because they are in the same post.

You made a declarative statement. I'll repost the posts of yours that I could find on the subject of respecting customs and relgion. I may have missed another post of yours on this subject, though, so feel free to let me know if I did (your initial claim will still be imbecilic, though):

This statement was in the context of when face coverings should be removed. That is, when face coverings are required to be removed (i.e. for identification by the police) then customs and religions should be respected. If it is custom for the husband to be present for the removal of the veil, he should be called in. If only women police officers are allowed to see the woman without her veil, then only women police officers should be used, etc.

You seem to place some non-negligible value on acts because they customs. You are aware that customs are just things people do, right? That means you are giving value to things simply because people do them. That is ridiculous.

Note the "obviously there are exceptions" which you ignored.

Unless you retract your main statement about customs having some inherent value due to being customs, it doesn't matter what else you follow it with. That view is illogical.

Please let me know how I manufactured a straw man argument here. I'm fucking dying to know. You made a moronic statement and I called you on it.

My position has always been (not just in this thread, but in other parts of this forum) that unless someone's rights are being infringed, there is no reason to prohibit certain behaviour. Your strawman was presenting a quote mine as my entire argument. You ignored the context of my "customs and religions should be respected" and presented it as if I was actually arguing that point, when I never did.

"Quote mine?" I posted literally everything you wrote on the subject in this thread. What the fuck did I mine? Regardless, there is absolutely no context in which your statement is not moronic. It doesn't matter if you have more arguments that are tangentially related if your basic premise is full of shit. Customs don't have value purely due to being customs. There must be a reason that they are worthwhile or not. You have abandoned reason and give them value for no reason at all. Apparently that Wiki link won't help, since it appears your problem is a failure to agree with reality instead of ignorance of the definition of straw man.

As for you not actually arguing that point, that's irrelevant. It's a viewpoint that you stated that you have and which colors your perception of this issue. Your faulty reasoning is undermining the rest of your argument, since you aren't evaluating the variables in a logical, rational way.

Calling you on your bullshit is not a straw man argument. I can link you to the Wikipedia article on straw man arguments if it'll help you educate yourself, though.

No, but taking a quote out of context and implying that I am arguing it is. No need to link me to the Wikipedia article; I have read it many times before.

There is no context for that quote to be taken out of, and it's bullshit to claim that there is. You stated that customs and religion deserve respect. There is no context wherein that statement is not idiotic.

Customs are just things people do. The fact that something is a custom gives you absolutely no hint as to whether it is a good thing or a bad thing.

Exactly why I was referring to specific customs, and noted there were exceptions in a general sense.

Bullshit. Your words didn't say this and there was nothing to imply that you were only talking about the one very narrow instance. Regardless, even if you were (which I don't buy), it doesn't make your statement any less moronic. You are still valuing customs without reason.

you're stating that we should respect things people do purely because people do them.

Nope.

I'd link you to a Wiki article on critical thinking, but it would work about as well as it does with creationists.

It's ridiculous, and a statement like that has no business coming from one who presumes to be logical and rational.

Exactly why I didn't make it.

It's not my fault if you say illogical things and fail to understand why they're illogical. Always strive to improve, though. I have the highest hopes for you.

We should weigh people customs using logic and reason, then decide which customs are worthy of respect. If you simply respect everything, your respect is worthless.

Finally we agree on something.

Unfortunately that statement is completely at odds with your original statement. Which is wrong? Are customs worthy of respect without needing a reason as you previously claimed, or do they need a reason to be respected? Your claims are contradictory.