Comment: What is smart about his

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Whoa (see in situ)

What is smart about his

What is smart about his argument?
a. He does not present any numbers or statistics to back up his thesis.
b. His premise "your problem with gays" is incorrect. He should at least have written "your problem with homosexual marriage".
c. His whole argument on the gay part is based on his friendship to an amazingly superb gay couple that is really nice and a model example to society. He could have made the same argument for banning guns if he had met an incredible nice person who is an extraordinary citizen but who is opposed to guns.
d. He tries to link two unrelated topics.
dd. He does this to manipulate people since he knows everyone here is for gun rights. So he uses "gun rights topic" which nobody is against to push his agenda on "gay marriage". This is the same as when the MSM labels a person as a racist for criticing Obama.
e. His writing style is manipulative instead of leaving the readers to find their answers. If you want to inform the readers and let them reach their own conclusions give them the numbers, establish causalities write logically. A "my really good friend is gay and he is very nice and he is examplary and thus you should be in favor of gay marriage" will not suffice.

Even if you are on a different side of the argument you should be able to recognize solid and intelligent logic vs. feel good/MSM type of reporting.