[FormerLib]

My objection is to your appeal to the poisoning of the well fallacy, where you define anyone who disagrees with you as "indecent" and dismiss their argument out of hand...

Actually, your error stems from the belief that I was attempting to define the term "indecent." In actuality, the term used to be well-known before morality was degraded into an opinion pole. Much can also be said for the term "racist", which is grossly overused by such folks as the Reverends Jackson and Sharpton, but you did not seem to object to my use of that term.

Hmmmmm...

[Dimensio]

Actually, your error stems from the belief that I was attempting to define the term "indecent."

You weren't defining the term "indecent". You were labelling anyone who disagreed with you with the term "indecent". If I were calling all gun control advocates "jackasses", it would not be an attempt to redefine "jackass", it would be using the definition of "jackass" to taint anyone with an opinion that differs from mine. It may well be the case that all gun control proponents are jackasses, but that alone does not nullify their arguments.

You're sinking into a game of semantics, arguing that you are right because anyone who disagrees with you clearly isn't worth hearing anyway.