(April 18, 2020 at 5:35 pm)Athene Wrote:1. I call i so because it is .And worst still it's an arbitrary one(April 18, 2020 at 4:03 pm)SUNGULA Wrote: 1.Which is only because their are rules .So why not more ?
2.More then if they just got the food (and yes it's food by definition )
3.Slippery slope fallacy
4.Yes yes you don't like her.That isn't an argument.
So overall no real objections here just pouting
You can call slippery-slope fallacy if you like, but to my mind, this isn't about debate decorum. It's about drawing a fucking line in the sand.
Truth of the matter is, governments DO use crises such as these to incrementally implement fuckshit they wouldn't dare under normal circumstances, because ordinarily people would have no problem recognizing it as tyranny.
So in such cases, yeah--I think it's a good idea for such overreach to be confronted before it gets out of hand.
2.Yes but that's not freaking happening .So put away your Alex Jones brand tinfoil hat .
3.Accept it's not overreach and your kind aren't confronting it .Half of you are just sulking .The other half are waving around guns .
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM