Debate Guide: "As a parent" or "as a survivor"
- "You clearly have no children. If you did, you would never argue for [POV] because all good parents would know what is in their child's best interest".
It was established many decades ago, that the child's own family is more of a danger than the general public. But that is old news from the 90s.
Your argument is a genetic fallacy. Parenthood fails to add to or subtract from the value of your argument. If you like, we could take the opposite tack and go into the intricacies of debating the merits of pedophiles' opinions on similar issues, but that would be equally fallacious. Ultimately, only reasoned, watertight arguments are going to help here. Can you provide them?
Parental bias
It may be worth mentioning that parents are often socially biased (a kind of reaction-formation).
Moral monopoly
Also note that hysterical parents do not have a monopoly on deciding what is in "the child's best interest". If they did, we would never be able to take into account the adverse effects of bad policies until a parent was effected.
Fallacies and cognitive distortions covered
- Ad hominem fallacy, or appeal to authority/nature: Appeal to the tenuous knowledge/authority and good intentions of a parent - either hypothetical or real.
- Cognitive distortion: Emotional reasoning