Appeal to force fallacy

Submitted by Mary Esterhammer-Fic (United States), Apr 10, 2011 at 09:45

World reaction has been another example of argumentum ad baculum--appeal to the threat of force. ("If you do this, dire consequences will result.") Jones is not "accountable" for the behavior of the rioters/murderers. Peter King was also attacked using this argument ("investigating radicalization will cause radicalization.") It is ridiculous that this fallacy, and others, are being taken seriously by people in government and the media. It just breathes life into mob actions.

Also, it is interesting that so many non-Muslims are jumping up to defend the sanctity of the Qur'an, yet no Muslims (that I have heard about) are vocally defending the sanctity of free speech. Why is all this "interfaith dialogue" one-way? Wouldn't that make it a "single faith monologue"?

Thanks to Mr. Pipes for once again speaking the truth.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".