Re: Immaculate conception

"Gumby" <stkwvr07@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
On May 20, 3:27 am, "alooo" <w...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Gumby" <gu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> > Darren Delgado wrote:
> >> "Are you so insecure about your worth and intellect that you feel the
> >> need to point out that [paraphrasing] YOU would never be duped by
such
> >> trash?"
>
> >> Phrasing it as a question is a cute rhetorical trick but it doesn't
> >> make it a more valid arguing tactic.
>
> > You still haven't shown an ad hominem remark. Look it up if you don;t
> > know what it means.
>
> He did show your ad hominem remark. It's right there on top.

>That's not an ad hominem remark. If I had called him an idiot or a pea-
>brain or something similar, that would qualify. Simply stating my
>negative opinion about someone's remarks is not rude nor ad hominem,

To quote you, "Look it up." Actually, I'll do it for you:

ad hominem
      1. appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests 
rather than to one's intellect or reason.
      2. attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his 
argument.


Your comment above fits the definition perfectly.