Dishonest or Stupid. Take your pick.

Over at The Corner John Derbyshire posts the following regarding cliches spouted by the pro-illegals side.

--"They're just coming here for a better life." Well, that's also the reason people rob banks. If you rob a bank and get away with it, you'll have a MUCH better life than you had before. Should we legalize bank robbery?

This is a point about the logic of the argument "If people do X for a better life, X should be legal." Derbyshire points out that this is silly. If "If people do X for a better life, X should be legal " is valid, then since bank robbers rob banks for a better life, bank robbery should be legal. Since bank robbery should obviously not be legal, the statement "If people do X for a better life, X should be legal" is false. QED.

This is met with the following response by John Miller

Derb: Surely you can't really believe that crossing the border to get a job, albeit against the laws of the United States, is the moral equivalent of robbing a bank. Would you rather live next door to a family of illegal aliens or a gang of bank robbers?

I find this type of response both common and infuriating. Miller is being simply amazingly stupid or dishonest. Pro-homosexual activists do the same tactic. They say "Sex acts between consenting adults should be legal." You respond "If that were true, then it should be legal for adult siblings to have sex." They respond "Now you're saying homosexuality is the same as incest!" No. No. No. The statement "If that were true, then it should be legal for adult siblings to have sex" is a statement about the validity of the statement "Sex acts between consenting adults should be legal." Nothing else.

There are good words for people who are incapable of using logic (idiots) and those who are capable but purposefully mischaracterize their opponents arguments (liars).