arguman.org is an argument analysis platform.

Feminism is not needed

It is.

Irrelevant Conclusion

It doesn't help the conversation at all, only agrees with the statement.

Justice and Law are mutually exclusive.

That which is illegal may be just.

Irrelevant Conclusion

This shows that Justice and Law are not mutually implicated, but not that they are mutually exclusive. An existential quantification cannot imply a universal quantification.

Justice and Law are mutually exclusive.

That which is unjust may be legal.

Irrelevant Conclusion

This shows that Justice and Law are not mutually implicated, but not that they are mutually exclusive. An existential quantification cannot imply a universal quantification.

Justice and Law are mutually exclusive.

That which is legal is not necessarily just.

Irrelevant Conclusion

This shows that Justice and Law are not mutually implicated, but not that they are mutually exclusive. An existential quantification cannot imply a universal quantification.

Justice and Law are mutually exclusive.

That which is just is not necessarily legal.

Irrelevant Conclusion

This shows that Justice and Law are not mutually implicated, but not that they are mutually exclusive. An existential quantification cannot imply a universal quantification.

Taxation is robbery

Taxation was and has always been a source of revenue that the government needs to function. It was how during the American revolution money was raised after defeating Britain, otherwise making ends meet with the debts we were in would have been nigh impossible.

Irrelevant Conclusion

Whether or not government could function as we're used, if it didn't tax, is irrelevant to the question of whether taxation is robbery.

PC gaming is better than console gaming

It is.

Appeal To Belief

This premise is under the thought of belief and offers no other critical evidence.

Emotions are made up, and don't at all separate humans from other animals.

emotions are made up by biochemical reactions

Irrelevant Conclusion

This premise doesn't contribute to the argument.

The death penalty should be abolished

100 serial killers escape each kills one innocent person => 100 innocent persons suffer

Fallacy Of Red Herring

My argument was that the possibility of wrongful convictions were an expressed concern during the formation of our judicial system making your argument against BF's general concerns non sequitor. The term "guilty" does not automatically mean serial killer, nor does a free serial killer necessarily kill again. But, the question is not about whether or not we should incarcerate, it is about whether or not we should kill after incarceration, given that a properly administered system may be impossible to guarantee.