So much for your faith.
When you are in need of absent authors to do your arguing for you -who are unable to defend their positions, rendering (two-way) exchange impossible- it implies you haven't got that much to say yourself (or that you are lazy - laziness doesn't qualify as a valid response, it qualifies as a character trait).
Quoting a passage or two in reference to the main point(s) of the subject matter at hand from a source you feel is relevant to the subject matter and provide a link to the source for reference is perfectly valid. Providing links only without a personal position on the matter implies you don't have one -hearsay doesn't really count you know- and if you don't have a position on the matter at hand or don't provide any, you stand empty-handed and don't offer much to discuss/debate.
In the realm of serious discussion/debate this is considered defaulting and in effect admitting defeat, putting yourself outside of the discussion/debate. Offering nothingness isn't much of an argument you know.
Always keep in mind that the human brain can only comprehend 3 categories to put information in.
New!! Improved!! Now With T-Formula!!