I suppose if the Buddha was a good and decent man, and he preached that one could have oblivian after death, then that's a pretty darn good case for oblivian after death. Especially against some nasty slob skeptic who probably beats his cows.
You're right, we tend to put far to much weight in the merits of arguments and not nearly enough in the characters of the arguers.
There is no conclusive evidence of life after death. But there is no evidence of any sort against it. Soon enough you will know. So why fret about it? Makes sense to me.