Comment by nobody9999

>I am not talking about your rights: this is a strawman argument.

Whose rights should I be talking/concerned about? Are my rights unimportant? Shall we just go ahead and strip me of my citizenship because I'm not talking about what you want me to talk about?

It's literally the question I asked and your position on that specific question I wanted to understand. I did not misrepresent your belief/argument, rather I asked you to elucidate your thoughts on a specific question.[1]

That's not a strawman argument, that's being curious about your beliefs and understanding of the laws of the United States.

In fact, your initial reply to my comment was, in fact, a straw man as you argued against a claim that I never made -- that somehow asking about the rights of the children, their age is irrelevant, as everyone is someone's child, of immigrants only related to the minor children of undocumented immigrants -- I made no such claim, except in the straw man you set up.

If you didn't want to answer that question, you were under no obligation to reply to me at all. Yet you chose to do so and argue against a claim I never made.

So it was you, not me who engaged in "refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction."[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[1] I suppose that my question could (as you apparently did) be considered a non-sequitur. Definitely not a straw man, as I didn't argue for or against anything. Rather,I asked for your beliefs/understanding of US law and the US Constitution.

Edit: Clarified the difference between a straw man and a non-sequitur -- in case GP's first language isn't English.