My pet troll is "chortling with glee" over "yet another example of how Ed Brayton is full of excrement" - with a link to a story on CNN that says that some gay couples in Massachusetts are getting divorced. Is there anything more pathetic that watching someone struggle so mightily to put together a coherent argument when they're just not capable of it? I suspect he doesn't actually MAKE the argument because he knows how stupid it is, so instead he just implies it as though it was self-evident. But let's try and reconstruct the thought process, such as it is, that leads to his chortling. In order to justify his claim that the fact of gay divorce means I'm "full of excrement", this must be the path of reasoning (yes, the term is used very loosely here):
Premise: If some of the gay couples who get married end up getting divorced, it means gay marriage is an absurd idea
Premise: Ed Brayton supports gay marriage
Fact: some gay marriages end in divorce
Conclusion: Ed Brayton is full of excrement for supporting gay marriage
Yum, he's dishing up more of that fallacy sauce. Can you spot the fallacy? It's right there in the first premise. The notion that gay divorce invalidates the concept of gay marriage is - what else could one call it? - just plain idiotic. Does the existence of divorce for straight couples invalidate heterosexual marriage? Of course not. No one with an IQ above room temperature would make such a stupid argument. Which, of course, explains why my pet troll does make it.