You said that cops who arrest people for violating the law are the kinds of people who make a Holocaust possible. If you would like to retract that statement and the “Jews in an oven” statement, we can move on or you can continue to attempt to defend your comparisons.
I stand by it. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are confused with my point and you are not trolling my contribution. The purpose of the analogy is not the details, it's the principle. I could have used a magical creature and it would not have mattered. Just as long as I point out
some people follow orders and by their actions harm innocent people. That's the main point.
Incidentally, without it, you can't have a Holocaust. But, I will not to argue this because it's not relevant to my point and it would take some time to explain based upon your previous method of argumentation. I'd rather just stick with one thing.
Like I said the first time around, you lost the argument when you violated Godwin’s Law. I have been gracious enough to explain the absurdity of such a claim and to allow you an opportunity to retract these ludicrous statements.
You misunderstand Godwin's Law. Godwin's Law is not a fallacy. It's not even a law. You can't violate it. It just suggests two significant things: that Hitler would at one point be brought up and that using Hitler inappropriately will diminish ones argument.
That fact that it was brought up by me, doesn't in and of itself create a fallacy. I used it appropriately, because I simply wanted to point out 'just following orders' where innocent people are harmed. Jews, Hitler, Cops, Monument, Dancing, really have nothing to do with that principle. They are only mediums to express a point.
As for my questions to you about Islam, your politics and whether you believe in GOD, I was simply trying to figure out where you are coming from.
What did you figure out? Should you be arrested for dancing around the point involving a monument?
As for whether or not the police in this action were enforcing the law or “just following orders" is totally relevant to the topic. You compared them to Nazis who were not following the law but were “just following orders” when they murdered people by the millions.
Again, analogies are drawn for points to form communication. Don't confuse the details of an analogy with the point it conveys. Nazis, Cops, murder by the millions, these details are not relevant. I have had to repeat one too many times, I'm beginning to hear an echo.
If you think a few cops who arrest a few people for breaking the law requires comparison to the holocaust to make your point, feel free to make it. Thus far all you have done is make yourself look like a fool for the comparison and more so by trying to defend it so have at it. Make your fresh new “non-Nazi comparison” point and dazzle us with your brilliance.
An argument is only brilliant if you don't use Hitler. Unclever to say the least.
It is the best analogy and clearest analogy we have in contemporary analogies for pointing out people "by only following orders, harm innocent people". The magnitude of evil is irrelevant. I don't need to find some comparative magnitude that fits molestation and assault of peaceful dancing people to convey a point. Often when children are being read a story by their parents that give a moral lesson such magnitudes in fantasy are used. But the moral lesson at the end is the all important point being made. A wise child can distinguish the fantasy from the principle. A foolish child will argue the insignificant details saying, "this can't happen, that can't happen, trees don't grow that big, etc., etc.," and miss the entire point.
Many people have the authority, the constitutional right and go ahead to do things. I don't disagree that rights exist, but in the end, if you exercise those rights and you harm an innocent person, you have not only exercised your rights, but committed a crime due to the result of your actions. Yelling fire in the theatre is legal expression, but not the harm that it may cause.
I'm not calling you a fool like you have done me, but I would be foolish at this point to continue this further because I'm confident I've made my point, so I'm out.
)
