I guess it is, to your argument. It is apples and oranges.
Nor have you offered any rebuttal to my argument.
While the 'is NOT! is TOO!' form of discourse is recognized as valid in the schoolyard, in the adult world failing to rebut arguments or support assertions results in default.
I am not here to win an argument. I am here to test the principles I hold by exposing them to challenge and learn where they are wrong -- to learn HOW and WHEN they can be applied validly.
Most peoples motives are not in accordance to this. They are out, like a roving street gang, to find someone to dominate and intimidate. Ideology is merely the *type* game they use to do this. Might as well be boxing or checkers, because they are only interested in fundamentals *as a means to* win. To dominate.
To validate themselves and thier position -- it's a form of 'my country, right or wrong'.
I *expect* you to discount all of this simply because we already disagree on topic X, and I *expect* you to be contemptuous because I have called-you-out on the type of game you (and most, even myself) are tempted to play.
Such is the nature of man.
The only way to improve ones correctness is to discover how they are wrong -- in what context does a principle lose validity and WHY. The dominance game is not conducive to that, it is merely the varnish on a mind that has atrophied.