SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Greg or e who wrote (20847)7/2/2005 1:22:01 PM
From: TigerPaw  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 28931
 
notice you did not dispute the quote

I'm not fond of watching cattle butchering either, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying a cheeseburger.

Since I was on the subject of logical fallacies elsewhere, I believe the name for that fallacy is Irrelevant Appeal to Emotion.

Maybe I should preempt a new fallacy that might arise. Just because I enjoy a cheeseburger doesn't mean I enjoy abortions. There are many preferable solutions or preventaions to unwanted pregnancy. Nearly all of the fallacies that are consistently found in this line of argument are ones of Equivocation or Appeal to Motive.

TP

P.S.
IF it were a hoax there surely would have been howls of protest and it should be easy to verify.
I'm not sure the name of this fallacy, but it is in the category of a Syllogism. I never heard of this practice before you brought it up, and I am reasonably well informed. Second, it is the responsibility of those those making the claim to supply the evidence for it. Anyone else can only show an absense of evidence, as I showed the absense of the company that supposidly prints out these price lists.

A cursory look at Google shows that the story is repeated multiple times, but only on anti-abortion web sites and with no new information added. If it were true then there would be plenty of sources supplying different accounts instead of just the same account cut and pasted into multiple web sites. -- That by the way is the same syllogistic argument, but reversed.

TP