Logical Fallacies

[Tempus]

How can someone actually make these arguments in a debate and gain respect for it? (Fallacies, I mean.) I'm not asking this as a biased opinion--I genuinely want to know what I'm missing here. I was always taught fallacies are never to be used in debate, but it seems that one could easily win a debate with such pathetic arguments. Perhaps I'm making something from nothing, but I'd love some input.

I wouldn't expect much from the type of audience that boos people, personally. While I think it's occasionally okay for someone to yell out a genuine concern from the audience*, booing is just a child's reaction; a sort of "I disagree with you so I'm going to make your public speaking hell" attitude. I'd wager most people there are simply unaware of logical fallacies. They weren't part of the typical education curriculum (i.e. outside specialised classes, like philosophy, debating, etc) when I went to school. I learned about them through my own reading relatively recently, but I don't know how it is in other schools around the world. People respect others if they think they make good points. Unfortunately, anything can sound like a good point to someone ignorant of the subject.

*I remember one debate between Dan Barker and some Catholic guy and the Catholic fellow dodged one of Dan's question. Someone from the audience yelled out "you didn't answer him" - that to me is an acceptable example.