THIS IS TOTALLY NEWS, GUYS. BRACE YOURSELVES.
I prefer to not be so informal and . . . irritated in my posts, but at this moment, I feel the need to scratch this irksome itch:
Whatever the case for one’s argument may (or may not) be, bandying “Christian” about as an ad hominem pejorative in said argument does not lend credibility to one’s point(s)/counterpoint(s), in any sense of the word. It’s just an emotional outburst with no substance, is no different than “Jew” as an insult is to antisemitism, and, like every other logical fallacy, has no place in any worthy discussion among intellects.
The same goes for “Eclectic” (as a veiled synonym for “cherry-picking, know-nothing fake Polytheist”) or “Wiccan” or “Recon,” and so on ad infinitum. One may think (s)he is discrediting hir debate partner(s) by throwing four-letter-words around, or turning their or someone else’s denomination into a four-letter-word, but is in actuality accomplishing nothing more than making an egregious ass of hirself while failing to provide any proper intellectual foundation for hir points/counterpoints. It’s no more substantive a statement than “YEAH? WELL, YOU’RE A BUCKET OF DOO-DOO BUTTER AND YOUR MOTHER DRESSES YOU FUNNY.”
If one is going to rip someone’s argument or unfounded statements apart (as per any professional field of History), one must be sure to have the sources to do it, use proper grammar, maintain composure, and steer clear of the other camp’s personal character. Counterpoints, when reasonably backed, are intellectually stimulating, challenging, and productive. That’s how outmoded theories get cycled out in favor of more current, more accurate ones. One can disagree without getting personal or breaking civility, and one can share and entertain ideas and concepts without accepting them. It is equally important to bear in mind that a rejection of an argument or idea is not necessarily or even normally a rejection of the individual who presented it.
While it may seem harsh to some, one person’s ignorance is not as good as another’s education. Name-calling falls under the “ignorance” category, to put it in exceptionally kind terms, and any argument containing them is worthy of nothing but summary dismissal.
