When is the legality of a law determined?
What was the line you had just quoted?
The constitutionality of the law is not determined until it is challenged.
I'm very aware of logical fallacies.
If that is true, you certainly have not applied that awareness to your arguments in this thread. They are riddled with logical fallacies.
My point, which you seem to ignore, is that I said that abstinence is a hallmark of the religious Right. I didn't say that abstinence in itself is religious. Are we clear on this?
We are. Are we clear on what my point is about why faith based initiatives have not yet been found to be unconstitutional? (You know, the
actual point of contention?)
I'm not sure I agree with you there. While McCarthyism was a rather scary force in American culture, it was never a question of what to be more scared of.
Yes, Claus, it was. Try re-reading my argument on this. McCarthyism was a knee-jerk reaction to the real source of
If you don't agree with the evidence, you don't agree with it.
I suppose that is true. But do you understand why I don't agree with it? It isn't even relevent. What you have provided is a non-sequitur.
U: Why is the sky blue?
C: Blueberries are also blue.
U: That isn't relevent.
C: If you don't agree with the evidence, you don't agree with it.
How is that evidence?
Yes, seriously. What changed in the meantime? But, hey, if you reject this evidence, how about this quote from Jefferson?
You think Jefferson was not speaking of God here?
Double standard. (eta: meaning you have committed a double standard argument, which is a logical fallacy.)
When I referenced Jefferson's words before on the matter of seperation of church and state, you rejected them because he wasn't the only writer of the DoI. Now, you expect me to accept his words alone when it suits your purposes.
Look, when you come up with something more than a paper-thin, fallacy-riddled, ad hoc rationalization for something that you have already decided must be true, let me know.
