Watching the confirmation process for Amy Barrett, one hears people say that her religion should not be a factor, and that if it is, bigotry has occurred. Likewise, if one says the Catholic church has inordinate political power in America, one may be called a bigot. Then there is Zionism. To some minds, any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic. A progressive who questions whether Israel's creation was justified may be put into the same category as Klan members. An American who questions why we have a homeless problem when the US gives billions of dollars in aid to Israel is condemned. Seems to me that both are cases of ad hominem debate, defined by Wikipedia as: Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. Should we all be more aware of this tactic and how lame it is? How it stifles debate and keeps the empowered in a dominate position?