We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
I have been lax with our fallacy fun, but suddenly some good'uns are thrown in my face. Reductio ad absurdum is not really a logical fallacy but, at its worse, a fallacy support and, at its best, a fairly compelling logical argument, eg (from Wiki):
Father- Why did you start smoking?
Daughter - All my friends were doing it.
Father- You're saying that if all your friends jumped off a cliff, you would do that too?
Reductio can serve the purpose of truth or the purpose of fallaciousness. Example:
"If we can go into Iraq to take out a murderous dictator, then we should take out every murderous dictator on earth."
As with the Slippery Slope Fallacy, some credibility is obtained via the logical thread, but the germ of logicality is rendered trivial by the reality and the context.
Attack Machine invented the entirely reasonable and useful notion of Dilatare ad Absurdum: Expansion to Absurdity. He presents a beautiful example of expansion to absurdity in a piece on the equating of basic human needs with human rights. In his example, both reality and context support the dilatare. It begins:
LA Mayor Antonio recently gushed, “Healthcare is a basic human need, and it ought to be a basic human right.”
If healthcare is a right, then:
Food must be a right, too. After all, you cannot be healthy if you don’t eat.
Clothing is a right because you cannot be healthy and naked (in most parts of the world.)
Read the whole thing. I like it. It's similar to the arguments I use to crush all of my commie friends, such as "People need cars to get to work. So why can't we all get free cars and free car insurance?" Or "Legal representation is a basic human right in a free country, so why don't we all get free lawyers?"
I am surprised you're trying to use something a politician said as an example of anything, much less logic.
May I suggest as an antidote a few chapters of H.L. Menchen to bring your Qi, or "life force" back into balance with regard to things political. And remember this is a pallative, not a curative, so occasional readings will be necessary.
Constitutional rights are about the right to be free from governmental interference when doing certain things, not about a right TO certain goods or services. Making those kind of things "rights" only empowers the government, not the individual citizen...obviously.
In MT we are engaged in a desperate struggle: to preserve what people from around the world tell us they want preserved. However, in order to do that we must confront some very naughty boys. Sociopaths, who believe it is their God given right to put any kind of building in any place, and the more the better.
Today, we meet to try to change the planning commissioner's minds about a developer, who does not believe in public sewer systems. He wants to put a large motel and some "working man's housing" (Duplexes) on the banks of the Big Blackfoot River (A River Runs Through It). As you may know we have very basic, simplistic, and primitive zoning laws in place. So, dear friends on the farm--how would you have me confront this argument and his claim? How would you have me defend this place? I need your informed suggestions by 1:00PM EDT. Thank you
The endless conflicts between freedom, private property, individual rights, and "collective" interests. The state, towns, or conservation orgs ought to buy the land, or the development rights to the land, to protect it - if that is what the people want.
I hate the idea of govt "taking," and I also hate the idea of random "development" and rape of the land for wampum, ans Buddy terms it, which is not good stewardship.
Well here we have it folks. C'mon down. One big deal developer just got permission to put an automobile sales lot on the Big Blackfoot River. Would have been nice to get the support of conservatives to help protect this place. Sometimes poliical ideology is no excuse for any side!