Personal Attack Headlines that Violate Proverbs 24:17

Forum (Articles)

Offer

Partners

Rules

Tips

SaveTheWorld:FAQ

Begin!

Donate

This forum was created by Dave Leach R-IA Bible Lover-musician-grandpa (talk) 17:10, 19 February 2023 (UTC) (talk) 02:31, 16 August 2019 (UTC) to help prolifers discuss the most effective evidence and legal arguments to include in legislation designed to force courts to address the overwhelming consensus of court-recognized fact finders that babies are people, which requires all states to outlaw abortion, according to the 14th Amendment, as Roe pointed, which Dobbs did not challenge. The original post of this article was condensed from "How States Can Outlaw Abortion in a Way that Survives Courts", by Dave Leach. Available as a paperback, Kindle, or as a free PDF.

---

Register (see Begin!) and join the discussion. Vote. Improve it. Critique it. Sign your name with 4 tildes ((~~~~)).

---

This helps explain why the wicked do so well in America:

Proverbs 24:15  Lay not wait, O wicked man, against the dwelling of the righteous; spoil not his resting place: 16  For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but the wicked shall fall into mischief. 17  Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth: 18  Lest the LORD see it, and it displease him, and he turn away his wrath from him. 19  Fret not thyself because of evil men, neither be thou envious at the wicked; 20  For there shall be no reward to the evil man; the candle of the wicked shall be put out. 

The Meaning of "Personal Attack", aka the Ad Hominem fallacy

Fallacy In Logic.com is doing God's work, identifying, not from Scripture but from logic, what is stupid about personal attacks, which are also called Mudslinging, Name-calling, Shooting the Messenger, and Damning the source. Official names: Argumentum ad hominem, Abusive fallacy.

The difference between the focus of Fallacy In Logic, which is on the intelligence of the accuser, and that of Proverbs 24:17, which is on the heart of the accuser. Comedian Will Rogers once said "Nowadays its a bigger crime to be dumb than dishonest." Personal attacks are both.

Satan is identified as "the Accuser": Revelation 12:10  And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

Focusing on the intelligence of Personal Attacks, Fallacy In Logic explains:

Definition: The fallacy of ad hominem abusive occurs when someone verbally attacks the person making an argument, rather than criticizing the validity of their claim. In other words, it’s an attempt to discredit someone’s argument by directing the focus on their supposed failings – that are unrelated to the issue at hand – such as their character, intelligence, physical appearance, or morals.

Examples from FallacyInLogic:

Carly: “I think that climate change is the most important issue of our time and everyone should acknowledge that.”

Jamie: “You didn’t even go to college, so no one should listen to you.”

___

Mike: “There are so many Earth-like planets out there that I think there must be life on some of them.”

Jenny: “What could you possibly know about this, you are an unemployed loser who spends all his time watching Netflix.”

When observations of your opponent's character, intelligence, etc. is NOT a "personal attack" and does NOT violate Proverbs 24:17

FallacyInLogic points out: "An argument against a person is not fallacious when it’s clearly relevant to the discussion. In other words, when the topic of an argument is directly related to a person’s characteristics, credentials, skills, or such. For instance, if someone in a position to enforce the law has acted against the law, then pointing it out may be valid and important to the debate."

FallacyInLogic says it is also not a personal attack when it is combined with criticism that addresses the topic. "When someone counters an opponent’s claim with a relevant and valid argument but makes an irrelevant insult simultaneously, it’s not an ad hominem. (It is an "insult".)"

I disagree. Any gratuitous insult is like using naughty words: it adds no intelligence to the discussion, and does detract from the "message" of your enemy by directing the audience's attention to the sins of its "messenger".

However, a response to error can be Biblically followed by introducing a new equally important truth which is proved by the existence of the error. Jesus responded to the logic of the Pharisees and followed that by observing that it was evidence of the motives of the Pharisees:

|200px|thumb|left|alt text |600px|thumb|left