Post a response:
| I focus on the nonsense of NU because it is fundamentally flawed. It's possible that someone could deny your assertion that AoC laws cause more harm on the basis that they do not have enough data to be convinced of it, and (expectably) nothing you say will be convincing. However, provided they at least reason logically, it would be harder for them to defend NU. It's always easier to attack their logic, because that strategy does not really rely on any assertion made by you which they mightn't accept. Instead, it forces them to attempt to defend their arguments as valid and logically sound, when they won't be. A difficult undertaking.... |