Creative Commons license icon

Reply to comment

As somebody who had volunteers for conservative causes a standard joke is a homophobe is conservative arguing with a liberal and the conservative is winning. The underlining joke is the liberal activist resorts to argument ad hominem (to attack the person than the argument)
The gist is one disagrees with a homosexual one is a homophobe and worst suffers form a mental illness. To make matters worse JM now attempts to link the same argument to fetishism in furry fandom and sinks into non sequitur territory. JM flawed proof does not follow his collusions. If I were to follow JM illogic then would objection to baby furs, means the objector has lenient baby fur tendencies?
They are many other issues like in the case of zoophilia, and animal lover would think zoophilia is animal abuse or baby furs behaving badly in public.

Reply

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <img> <b> <i> <s> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <sub> <sup> <object> <embed> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <dl> <dt> <dd> <param> <center> <strong> <q> <cite> <code> <em>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This test is to prevent automated spam submissions.
Leave empty.