The Heinz dilemma is a frequently used example in many ethics and morality classes. One well-known version of the dilemma, used in Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development, is stated as follows: A woman was on her deathbed. There was one drug that the doctors said would save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: “No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it.” So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's laboratory...
And you can check. This isn't an account I control.
Ok, cool. That proves what? That you still don't have an argument?
And again a strawman.
Seriously, I specifically criticize your argument. There's no mention of you as a person.
Shhh they just learned about fallacies and may be having a stroke. Now that's an ad hominem.
Is it still ad hominem if I'm insulting them because their arguments are bad?