▲ 306 ▼ [CW: Slurs] Any attempt to connect with my dad immediately turns into "Woke liberals are ruining the world." (lemmy.ca) submitted 2 years ago by Zoidsberg@lemmy.ca to c/mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world NSFW 97 comments fedilink hide all child comments NSFW'd for language.
[+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -40 points 2 years ago (3 children) I’m sorry what? Can you substantiate what you said about the conservative platform? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago (1 child) The clear anti-LGBTQ+ conservative stance is no secret. Same with the white supremacy and Christian nationalism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -16 points 2 years ago (1 child) The claim is that the platform is based on wanting to destroy lives. Are you saying that the “clear” anti-LGBTQ+ stance is such that they are seeking to destroy the lives of those people? I’ve never once heard anyone on the right declare a desire to destroy anyone’s lives. I’m open to being proven wrong, but that would require a link to such a declaration. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago* (1 child) This feels like a bad faith hair-splitting argument. But just in case you’re not being deliberately obtuse, the conservative platform views LGBTQ+ rights, minority voting rights, women’s bodily rights, and many other important matters of human freedom and livelihood as invalid. Just because they don’t explicitly say “our platform is specifically to maliciously destroy the lives of these people”, doesn’t mean the de facto platform is not destructive of those lives. Edit: Freudian typo hate->hair permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -14 points 2 years ago (1 child) the conservative platform views LGBTQ+ rights, minority voting rights, women’s bodily rights, and many other important matters of human freedom and livelihood as invalid Yes, I’m very familiar with this image of conservatives. The difference is I’m asking you to link to a conservative individual or organization taking this stance. What you consider “bad faith” is me issuing a challenge that I don’t think you’re going to be able to meet. It’s a rhetorical method where you’re supposed to try and then realize you can’t, and then have the presence of mind to realize that it’s significant that you can’t find this thing you claim exists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago Are you fucking kidding me? It took all of two seconds to find a catalog of the conservative scion himself actively stripping LGBTQ+ rights: https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/lgbtq-rights-rollback Unless for some reason the only valid rhetorical claim is for there to be a recognized conservative leadership organization explicitly codifying in its charter that trans people should die, you’re wasting my time with your willful ignorance. permalink fedilink source parent [–] thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com 20 points 2 years ago (1 child) I mean, just look at literally anything they've done in the past few decades. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -11 points 2 years ago That probably works well for convincing people who already agree with you. When someone claims “A” and I say “I’m skeptical of this A”, a rejoinder like “Well A is obvious if you look at things” isn’t very convincing. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 7 points 2 years ago Also just like more generally if you take "conservative" to mean "keep things the way they are" and accept the way things are is pretty bad for a lot of people, it becomes difficult to ethically support a conservative stance. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago (1 child) The clear anti-LGBTQ+ conservative stance is no secret. Same with the white supremacy and Christian nationalism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -16 points 2 years ago (1 child) The claim is that the platform is based on wanting to destroy lives. Are you saying that the “clear” anti-LGBTQ+ stance is such that they are seeking to destroy the lives of those people? I’ve never once heard anyone on the right declare a desire to destroy anyone’s lives. I’m open to being proven wrong, but that would require a link to such a declaration. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago* (1 child) This feels like a bad faith hair-splitting argument. But just in case you’re not being deliberately obtuse, the conservative platform views LGBTQ+ rights, minority voting rights, women’s bodily rights, and many other important matters of human freedom and livelihood as invalid. Just because they don’t explicitly say “our platform is specifically to maliciously destroy the lives of these people”, doesn’t mean the de facto platform is not destructive of those lives. Edit: Freudian typo hate->hair permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -14 points 2 years ago (1 child) the conservative platform views LGBTQ+ rights, minority voting rights, women’s bodily rights, and many other important matters of human freedom and livelihood as invalid Yes, I’m very familiar with this image of conservatives. The difference is I’m asking you to link to a conservative individual or organization taking this stance. What you consider “bad faith” is me issuing a challenge that I don’t think you’re going to be able to meet. It’s a rhetorical method where you’re supposed to try and then realize you can’t, and then have the presence of mind to realize that it’s significant that you can’t find this thing you claim exists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago Are you fucking kidding me? It took all of two seconds to find a catalog of the conservative scion himself actively stripping LGBTQ+ rights: https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/lgbtq-rights-rollback Unless for some reason the only valid rhetorical claim is for there to be a recognized conservative leadership organization explicitly codifying in its charter that trans people should die, you’re wasting my time with your willful ignorance. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -16 points 2 years ago (1 child) The claim is that the platform is based on wanting to destroy lives. Are you saying that the “clear” anti-LGBTQ+ stance is such that they are seeking to destroy the lives of those people? I’ve never once heard anyone on the right declare a desire to destroy anyone’s lives. I’m open to being proven wrong, but that would require a link to such a declaration. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago* (1 child) This feels like a bad faith hair-splitting argument. But just in case you’re not being deliberately obtuse, the conservative platform views LGBTQ+ rights, minority voting rights, women’s bodily rights, and many other important matters of human freedom and livelihood as invalid. Just because they don’t explicitly say “our platform is specifically to maliciously destroy the lives of these people”, doesn’t mean the de facto platform is not destructive of those lives. Edit: Freudian typo hate->hair permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -14 points 2 years ago (1 child) the conservative platform views LGBTQ+ rights, minority voting rights, women’s bodily rights, and many other important matters of human freedom and livelihood as invalid Yes, I’m very familiar with this image of conservatives. The difference is I’m asking you to link to a conservative individual or organization taking this stance. What you consider “bad faith” is me issuing a challenge that I don’t think you’re going to be able to meet. It’s a rhetorical method where you’re supposed to try and then realize you can’t, and then have the presence of mind to realize that it’s significant that you can’t find this thing you claim exists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago Are you fucking kidding me? It took all of two seconds to find a catalog of the conservative scion himself actively stripping LGBTQ+ rights: https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/lgbtq-rights-rollback Unless for some reason the only valid rhetorical claim is for there to be a recognized conservative leadership organization explicitly codifying in its charter that trans people should die, you’re wasting my time with your willful ignorance. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago* (1 child) This feels like a bad faith hair-splitting argument. But just in case you’re not being deliberately obtuse, the conservative platform views LGBTQ+ rights, minority voting rights, women’s bodily rights, and many other important matters of human freedom and livelihood as invalid. Just because they don’t explicitly say “our platform is specifically to maliciously destroy the lives of these people”, doesn’t mean the de facto platform is not destructive of those lives. Edit: Freudian typo hate->hair permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -14 points 2 years ago (1 child) the conservative platform views LGBTQ+ rights, minority voting rights, women’s bodily rights, and many other important matters of human freedom and livelihood as invalid Yes, I’m very familiar with this image of conservatives. The difference is I’m asking you to link to a conservative individual or organization taking this stance. What you consider “bad faith” is me issuing a challenge that I don’t think you’re going to be able to meet. It’s a rhetorical method where you’re supposed to try and then realize you can’t, and then have the presence of mind to realize that it’s significant that you can’t find this thing you claim exists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago Are you fucking kidding me? It took all of two seconds to find a catalog of the conservative scion himself actively stripping LGBTQ+ rights: https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/lgbtq-rights-rollback Unless for some reason the only valid rhetorical claim is for there to be a recognized conservative leadership organization explicitly codifying in its charter that trans people should die, you’re wasting my time with your willful ignorance. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -14 points 2 years ago (1 child) the conservative platform views LGBTQ+ rights, minority voting rights, women’s bodily rights, and many other important matters of human freedom and livelihood as invalid Yes, I’m very familiar with this image of conservatives. The difference is I’m asking you to link to a conservative individual or organization taking this stance. What you consider “bad faith” is me issuing a challenge that I don’t think you’re going to be able to meet. It’s a rhetorical method where you’re supposed to try and then realize you can’t, and then have the presence of mind to realize that it’s significant that you can’t find this thing you claim exists. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago Are you fucking kidding me? It took all of two seconds to find a catalog of the conservative scion himself actively stripping LGBTQ+ rights: https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/lgbtq-rights-rollback Unless for some reason the only valid rhetorical claim is for there to be a recognized conservative leadership organization explicitly codifying in its charter that trans people should die, you’re wasting my time with your willful ignorance. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago Are you fucking kidding me? It took all of two seconds to find a catalog of the conservative scion himself actively stripping LGBTQ+ rights: https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/lgbtq-rights-rollback Unless for some reason the only valid rhetorical claim is for there to be a recognized conservative leadership organization explicitly codifying in its charter that trans people should die, you’re wasting my time with your willful ignorance. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com 20 points 2 years ago (1 child) I mean, just look at literally anything they've done in the past few decades. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -11 points 2 years ago That probably works well for convincing people who already agree with you. When someone claims “A” and I say “I’m skeptical of this A”, a rejoinder like “Well A is obvious if you look at things” isn’t very convincing. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -11 points 2 years ago That probably works well for convincing people who already agree with you. When someone claims “A” and I say “I’m skeptical of this A”, a rejoinder like “Well A is obvious if you look at things” isn’t very convincing. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 7 points 2 years ago Also just like more generally if you take "conservative" to mean "keep things the way they are" and accept the way things are is pretty bad for a lot of people, it becomes difficult to ethically support a conservative stance. permalink fedilink source parent
