|
Calling me a sealion is an ad hominem. No it isn't. he bleats "sealion" as an excuse to not respond to anything I said. When "what you said" has already been addressed in previous discussions then the correct choice is to recognize the sealion attack and refuse to be baited into going of topic to revisit the previously settled issues. Except they arent previously settled. Considering something previously settled is an opinion. If someone considers it previously settled, then for that person it's previously settled. No one is saying that you can't make the same old asinine arguments with fresh victims. That wouldn't be sealioning. You dont know what an argument is. There is more than one way to define what an argument is. Telling people that they don't know what simple basic words mean isn't the own you think it is. Did that work with "molest" or "rape" or "assault?" This gets to the root of the issue and partly goes to explain why autistic pedophiles are more likely to end up sex offenders than normie peds. They get used to going by weird stretched out definitions of words and then when they get caught try to bully others into using their niche definitions which just happen to draw the moral line just behind themselves. As long as themselves (and a few dimwits online) were all they had to convince, they were fine, but normal people, like say people on a jury, aren't likely to share those definitions. ![]() |