I don’t believe you did any research before you chose to omit the most important FACT. The one fact that makes the rest of your assertions a bit nutty. I kinda thought you were over the top before, but this just confirms it. Interesting irrelevant and completely made up scary hypotheticals, tho.[/quote]
Actually, I really don’t care what you believe. The super-duper-important “fact” that you are strangely clinging to was irrelevant to the point I was making, which is why I chose not to bring it up in my post. It was really a silly sidebar to get caught up on, and the court obviously isn’t clinging as tightly to this fact as you are – or it would not be hearing the case.
And you know what? At least I responded to your question. I explained why the fact you pointed to was irrelevant to my analysis. But what do you do? Ignore all of the other follow-up questions I posed above and retreat to the one fact you think unhinges my entire argument. Give your mind some practice and try actually responding to points raised in a debate instead of ignoring the ones that are inconvenient for you.
I don’t know what you do for a living, but I sincerely hope it doesn’t involve reasoned argument or analysis, because your response demonstrates that both are lacking. *Sigh*
