What we know of Spurgeon is what he spoke from the pulpit, not what he spoke in common conversation. I doubt very seriously if he would have attacked a political argument by claiming that the person he was speaking to was not worthy of respect because he had different religious views than Spurgeon.
You want to disparge people for their religious beliefs, do it on the religion threads. The rationality of Edward Watson's political views has nothing to do with whether or not he is a Mormon or a Hindu or anything else. His arguments stand on their own.
Unfortunatly yours don't.
“You want to disparge people for their religious beliefs, do it on the religion threads. The rationality of Edward Watson’s political views has nothing to do with whether or not he is a Mormon or a Hindu or anything else.”
No I am using a person’s obvious gullibility to question their credibility. Standard court room procedure. If he is foolish enough to buy into Joseph Smith’s flim flam, he has no business telling others that they are being scammed. The whole underlying thesis of his arguement.