[Rembrandt_fan]

An ad hominem fallacy is one wherein the character of a person is impugned to discredit his argument, rather than debating the points of his argument directly. Ad hominem translates as 'at (or to) the man'. Thus, calling you and your like-minded friends cult members is not an ad hominem attack. I do so directly--and correctly--using a method my attorney father called the duck test: 'If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is a duck.' Empty heads and glassy, vacant stares are common attributes of cult members, thus that particular allusion.

Of course I feel compassion for the dead in those two now-defunct cities. 'Love the sinner, hate the sin' is a central tenet of my faith. Surprised, though, that an objectivist would use a Biblical reference. I would think someone ascribing to Ayn Rand's belief system would draw from a different well.

[CSM]

Let's see, you call me a cult member with an empty head and a glassy stare, then you admit to blindly following certain tenents of your faith. Finally, you admit to being surprised with my thinking outside of the supposed cult I am following.

Makes me wonder who is the cult member, by your description, with an empty head and glassy eyes.

I never said I agreed with Ayn Rand 100% of the time, in fact I said that I haven't read very much of her work. What I have read has made some very good philosophical arguments for the free market and capitalism. I always hear people try to degrade her philosophy with certain claims, yet I have yet to actually have these claims of her positions documented. If they exist, then I am more than willing to take a look at it and make the decision after reading it.