# Bob McDonnell trial/conviction **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 5, 2014, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bob-mcdonnell-trial-conviction/697583 "2014-09-05T14:37:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2015, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bob-mcdonnell-trial-conviction/697583/81 "2015-01-07T21:47:24Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > OK, not being Catholic I missed JP’s reinterpretation of Ephesians 22. And I guess I’m not familiar with the contents of his approved Catechism either. I can certainly imagine a more _sola Scriptura_ Christian faith having a more narrow view of the matter, although I believe (without investigating the matter) that most mainstream Christian traditions wouldn’t compel the conclusion **Yogsooth** urges either. But to impute it to the Roman Catholic McDonnell is unsupportable. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2015, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bob-mcdonnell-trial-conviction/697583/82 "2015-01-09T18:58:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > This is Great Debates. If you didn’t mean your remark to be factual and in support of a debate, then please make that clear. Prove that I invited a debate first, then prove that of typical Christians, demonizing your wife to avoid jail is not a repugnant thing to do > [@Bricker](#): > > Cite? What specific Christian teaching is that? Cite that Christian beliefs are not deeply held lifestyles often self-imposed through personal interpretation. Then prove that having been taught a particular interpretation is the only recourse to validate those beliefs. > [@Bricker](#): > > And if the answer is not, “Roman Catholic,” then please explain how it’s relevant to a view of how McDonnell, a Roman Catholic, should have acted. No need to hide behind your religion Bricker, its plain to everyone why you defended him and what your beef with me is. Just admit, or confess if that makes you feel better, that you’re only defending him because he’s a fellow religious conservative that you don’t like seeing attacked by liberals, even though he is precisely the type of person whom you should shun because they do a disservice to your beliefs. He ain’t a good guy Brick! And he’s doing shit to his wife! If he weren’t such a an ass, he’d fall on the sword and take the blame ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2015, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bob-mcdonnell-trial-conviction/697583/83 "2015-01-09T19:46:41Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Prove that I invited a debate first, then prove that of typical Christians, demonizing your wife to avoid jail is not a repugnant thing to do > > Cite that Christian beliefs are not deeply held lifestyles often self-imposed through personal interpretation. Then prove that having been taught a particular interpretation is the only recourse to validate those beliefs. No, the burden of proof lies on you. Real debaters do not make stupid remarks and then say “prove me wrong”. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2015, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bob-mcdonnell-trial-conviction/697583/84 "2015-01-09T20:34:36Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Prove that I invited a debate first, then prove that of typical Christians, demonizing your wife to avoid jail is not a repugnant thing to do You made the claim. Demanding that I prove your claim wrong, rather than you having the burden to prove your claim correct, is an example of the _argument from ignorance_ [fallacy:](http://skepdic.com/ignorance.html) > [@](#): > > The argument to ignorance is a logical fallacy of irrelevance occurring when one claims that something is true only because it hasn’t been proved false, or that something is false only because it has not been proved true. A claim’s truth or falsity depends on supporting or refuting evidence to the claim, not the lack of support for a contrary or contradictory claim. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Cite that Christian beliefs are not deeply held lifestyles often self-imposed through personal interpretation. Then prove that having been taught a particular interpretation is the only recourse to validate those beliefs. Same problem: > [@](#): > > The argument to ignorance is a logical fallacy of irrelevance occurring when one claims that something is true only because it hasn’t been proved false, or that something is false only because it has not been proved true. A claim’s truth or falsity depends on supporting or refuting evidence to the claim, not the lack of support for a contrary or contradictory claim. You made the claim. You cannot assert that it’s true simply because no one has proved it false. > [@](#): > > He ain’t a good guy Brick! And he’s doing shit to his wife! If he weren’t such a an ass, he’d fall on the sword and take the blame I don’t say he’s a good guy. But merely because he’s not a good guy does not legitimize any criticism leveled against him. Specifically, your comments were untrue. If you want to withdraw them and substitute the observation that he’s not a good guy, you’ll have no further objection from me. But you can’t use his lack-of-good-guyness as a vehicle to pin him with untrue attacks. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bob-mcdonnell-trial-conviction/697583.md?page=4)