Fair enough.
Now, let tell you a little story.
I have spent quite a bit of time arguing with people recently about Immigration and Asylum in the UK. Many of those who are very “withdraw from the Genva Convention” about it often criticise those of us who are pro-immigration and anti-border controls. “You keep calling us racist,” they claim, “you can’t have a proper debate if insults are thrown about.”
Now, some people on my side have a problem with this. “They are racist,” they moan. “Some of what they say is cut from Hitler’s cloth!” I, for the most part, agreed with them. However, I decided that enough was enough. The first thing I did was to agree with my opponents outright. “Yes,” I said, “all this talk of racism stifles free debate, so let’s have none of it and talk about the facts.” Some time later, they were dead in the water.
My point? If you want to prove me wrong about something, don’t bother calling the “you’re an anti-semite” stuff. It might be right, it might be wrong. Who is to say? You won’t convince anyone who knows me that I am, but you might convince yourself, for all the good it will do you.
On the other hand, if you were to argue with me on the issues presented, and defeat me on those, that would be a resounding victory that would, no doubt, influence some of those on the SDMB, as well as the other people who I meet (after all, I have said before that I have no fear of having been wrong in the past, but I would hate to be wrong now - prove me wrong and watch me change my mind!)
This can either become a slanging match along the lines of “you’re an anti-semite!” “am not!” “are too!”, or it can be a debate on the issues. I have less than zero interest in taking part in the former, because it’s utterly pointless. If you are convinced that I am anti-semitic, then feel free to believe it: I shan’t waste my time denying it to you.
