Let us review, so that your error may be shown to you:
Man came before woman. Therefore, men and women are different in their roles.
“Therefore” makes the post an argument, regardless of how you intended it. That is why we use “therefore:” it introduces logical consequence. If the consequence does not follow from the premise(s), it is a non sequitur.
Therefore, you are wrong. See? That statement follows from my argument.
Do you understand what non-sequitur means?
Clearly better than you do.
Perhaps what lead to your confusion was my use of the word “Therefore”. If that was the reason, you can take what I said as simply the ‘difference of gender’.
So, I was right, and you were wrong. If you meant something other than what you said, that is fine. But the error lies decidedly with you.
Theologically speaking, order of creation implies a difference in roles. What I said above would be a non-sequitor if you reject the theological idea of the importance of man coming before woman and woman being made for man and not vice versa.
First, for someone who is outright claiming that I do not know about what I am speaking, you could at least spell the term of which I am allegedly ignorant correctly.
Second, the statement “theologically speaking, order of creation implies a differnece in roles” is a further demonstration that the original statement was logically fallacious because this crucial premise was lacking.
Third, I ask why order of creation implies a difference in roles.