Submitted by lettuceLeafer in OnLettuceLeafersAuthority

Like this lib lady who is pro abortion sorry pro choice I allways forget bc I'm pro abortion not pro choice. Which is another one of the situations "no one's pro abortion".

But this guy said he was cool with abortion but thought it was wrong in the third trimester. And this lady is like no no one wants that and no one is killing babies.

And I'm always super annoyed because I'm totally cool with killing babies and third trimester abortions are no big deal. Not even abortions 1 hour before delivery are problematic to me. I'm not sure if that's even possible though.

If u don't wanna baby I see no issue mercy killing it. If u don't like it buy their baby or adopt it. Im sure almost all mother's would rather their baby goes into good hands then bash their own kids head in. But killing your own baby is a completely no problematic action.

Yes I'm pro abortion and yes killing babies is fine. Libs need to shut up because this is the only non reactionary conservative position on abortion and people's right to choose that I'm and u should believe.

11

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

lettuceLeafer OP wrote (edited )

Oh yeah and my take that straight and cis people shouldn't exist. Libs prob would say no one is saying that either.

Or how I think it would be based for native Americans to drone strike Americans as a decololonialist program.

Oh or how when I say abolish the police I want a lawless society with no alternative.

9

[deleted] wrote

1

lettuceLeafer OP wrote

the normal people of cis hetero society being annoying is a whole other rant lol.

Tho to clarify its not like I hate them. Its just a foolish way to live ones life plus they are often really annoying if not harmful.

1

asterism wrote

Oh yeah and my take that straight and cis people shouldn't exist.

Would the argument here be similar to the one someone makes about the white race not existing?

Or are you arguing that people that (and forgive me because I am terrible with how these things are phrased and I am 100% certain this is the wrong way) have penises shouldn''t be solely attracted to people who have vaginas and vice versa?

Only asking because my understanding of gender stuff could always use expanding.

1

lettuceLeafer OP wrote

Nah.

Basically if gender is based on you being what you identify sexuality makes no sense. Let's say you are attracted to your wife and one day she decided she wants to be a feminine man. He wears the same clothes and doesn't change his look because he likes how he looks as a man.

Kinda silly but your once wife is indeed a man. Unless you believe there is some essential characteristic to gender which would be ridiculous as gender is incredibly malleable if you claim pink or tights or makeup are something that makes you a woman there are edge cases or past examples of masculinity being those three things that it would be ridiculous to claim.

Now that you wife is now a man let's for arguments sake day u identify as straight. Now you wife who you were attracted to is now a man but nothing changed other than his gender identity and pronouns.

It would be ridiculous to claim that you are no longer attracted to your now husband. Appearance and personality is the same. Unless the main source of your attraction comes from pronouns which sounds absurd.

Now you could be homophobic or transphobic and the fact that your husband is now gay and trans could cause you to loose attraction. But for the average non transphobe and non homophobe sexuality is a ridiculous belief if you believe gender is what u identity as.

And to be frank I think that is the only non transphobic position. I don't know how someone could possibly in a non transphobic whay hear that someone says they are a women but then argue that they aren't a woman because of something inate.

Sexuality is just a weird fall off from a incorrect idea that how someone looks has anything to do with gender. And like if you not a transphobe belivkng in sexuality just makes u look like u don't have well formed opinions or are too much of a sheeple to think for yourself basically.

Tldr: it makes no logical sense to be exclusively straight or gay if your not transphobic.

2

Majrelende wrote (edited )

I can't remember exactly, but there is a particular volatile personality in for whom I think I remember using that. Of course, it had no effect, and I was sacrificing my own viewpoint, trying to escape, by saying, "that doesn't necessarily mean..." This person argues very rigidly, and will only leave the other alone when they have battered them into submission, so you know how this ended.

2

lettuceLeafer OP wrote

Oh I forgot the oldie but a goodie. Drivers licenses are racist which is a big reason why I'm against drivers licenses

2

asterism wrote

Man my conservative in-laws brains would probably melt out of their skulls if I tried to make this argument.

But am I hoping too hard that I think liberals should be able to get this one?

1

lettuceLeafer OP wrote (edited )

"sure I understand, but not in my backyard. If you drive without a driver license I'm calling the cops"

Tho if you argued with a social democrat maybe but its not like they would be anti drivers license just "lets vote bernie sanders to solve drivers licenses"

BTW I rarely talk to liberals so these are two people I made up in my head. Its literally a strawperson argument

Edit: wow never thought I would ever get so woke that I wrote strawman, deleted man and replaced it with person. I wouldn't wanna assume the informal fallacy's gender.

3