That is precisely what I am doing, and not falsely. What's funny are the resulting "well yeah, but" logical fallacies.
Let me rephrase -- it strains credulity to believe that your sole purpose for equating this person with the taliban is to note that they both don't allow women to teach men.
Because that particular subset of the one belief of the taliban is not actually offensive, but is a spirirtually sound doctrine, not entirely unexpected because the roots of most false religions are grounded in the truth, because that's the best way to deceive people, to start with a small kernel of truth but then distort it or use it to mislead them.
Much like you are doing here with your "innocent" factoid "equating" this man to the taliban.
"That is precisely what I am doing, and not falsely. What's funny are the resulting "well yeah, but" logical fallacies."
So you admit to being a troll?
NOT, as you not innocently but falsely protest, to merely connect the two minor things they have in common.
"That is precisely what I am doing, and not falsely. What's funny are the resulting "well yeah, but" logical fallacies."
You obviously have no idea what a fallacy of logic is since that is YOUR actual position and what YOU are doing. You sir, are saying because dog is mammal and man is mammal, therefore dog is man.
With your logic...I can then presume YOU are taliban. Taliban drinks water and YOU drink water....