You don’t understand what an ad hominem is. It absolutely is relevant to the argument whether or not the source is trustworthy. You cannot use a propaganda outlet as a source and then pretend people need to address that as if it is real. If it were an ad hominem you would be able to link to real evidence.
That’s what an ad hominem fallacy is, you are dismissing the article based on the creators not the content.
Post-birth abortions are fictional. Donald is a liar. Donald was caught in an obvious and large lie, one of hundreds he has told. Kamala simply did not lie as blatantly. It was not “three on one,” and it is pathetic to pretend that it was.
More ad hominem falicies, I provided a source that shows abortionists letting babies die on a table after birth.
Why don’t you go generate some AI images of A-list celebrities pretending they like Donald to self-soothe instead of trying to insist that everyone else believe the propaganda which fuels your fear addiction.
The unhinged ranting of a lunatic who can’t provide a source for his claim.
It would be hilarious to see you as a lawyer working with a witness that has previously lied on the stand. “Your witness is not credible, they have accepted money to lie in the past.” “That’s an ad hominem, you cannot do that.”
You are above the level of comprehension like “ad hominem is when my feelings hurt,” but you still do not understand what it means. You should try to learn more about it before continuing to use it as a claim.
You did not provide a source for letting “babies” “die” on a table after “birth.” You provided delusional propaganda where a liar was willing to write that based on weird definitions that nobody but you regressives agree with.
You additionally are confirmed to support child molesters harming children, rapists harming their victims, and want a rapist in the White House. Disgusting and repugnant.
It would be hilarious to see you as a lawyer working with a witness that has previously lied on the stand. “Your witness is not credible, they have accepted money to lie in the past.” “That’s an ad hominem, you cannot do that.”
At least you learned what an ad hominem fallacy is, you’re a little less ignorant now. If you want to treat it like a court case you would need to provide evidence that the author has made up articles in the past, you have not.
You did not provide a source for letting “babies” “die” on a table after “birth.” You provided delusional propaganda where a liar was willing to write that based on weird definitions that nobody but you regressives agree with.
The only source you’ve provided was one which ended up discrediting your claim that abortions are denied when the life of the mother is in jeopardy. You haven’t provided others and instead rely on logical falicies to prove your point.
You additionally are confirmed to support child molesters harming children, rapists harming their victims, and want a rapist in the White House. Disgusting and repugnant.
Crazy rantings of a person who enjoys babies being left to die on a cold hard table.
I did provide evidence. You know full well the Heritage Foundation is not credible.
You guys have nothing but lies on top of delusions. No babies are dying on a table. You are just a rape fan inventing fake shit to support control over women.
I did provide evidence. You know full well the Heritage Foundation is not credible.
That’s not evidence it’s an accusation. Where’s the proof that the article is false? Where’s the proof the author made up the quotes from the Minnesota Department of health? You know full well the article is accurate.
You guys have nothing but lies on top of delusions. No babies are dying on a table. You are just a rape fan inventing fake shit to support control over women.
If there are lies you should be able to find proof of those lies but you’re too busy fantasizing about killing babies to provide proof.
That’s what an ad hominem fallacy is, you are dismissing the article based on the creators not the content.
More ad hominem falicies, I provided a source that shows abortionists letting babies die on a table after birth.
The unhinged ranting of a lunatic who can’t provide a source for his claim.
It would be hilarious to see you as a lawyer working with a witness that has previously lied on the stand. “Your witness is not credible, they have accepted money to lie in the past.” “That’s an ad hominem, you cannot do that.”
You are above the level of comprehension like “ad hominem is when my feelings hurt,” but you still do not understand what it means. You should try to learn more about it before continuing to use it as a claim.
You did not provide a source for letting “babies” “die” on a table after “birth.” You provided delusional propaganda where a liar was willing to write that based on weird definitions that nobody but you regressives agree with.
You additionally are confirmed to support child molesters harming children, rapists harming their victims, and want a rapist in the White House. Disgusting and repugnant.
At least you learned what an ad hominem fallacy is, you’re a little less ignorant now. If you want to treat it like a court case you would need to provide evidence that the author has made up articles in the past, you have not.
The only source you’ve provided was one which ended up discrediting your claim that abortions are denied when the life of the mother is in jeopardy. You haven’t provided others and instead rely on logical falicies to prove your point.
Crazy rantings of a person who enjoys babies being left to die on a cold hard table.
I did provide evidence. You know full well the Heritage Foundation is not credible.
You guys have nothing but lies on top of delusions. No babies are dying on a table. You are just a rape fan inventing fake shit to support control over women.
That’s not evidence it’s an accusation. Where’s the proof that the article is false? Where’s the proof the author made up the quotes from the Minnesota Department of health? You know full well the article is accurate.
If there are lies you should be able to find proof of those lies but you’re too busy fantasizing about killing babies to provide proof.