iBeng
Intentionally left blank
- Apr 3, 2012
- 58,148
- 66,409
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Today on Republicans dont understand how the internet works...
What the hell is 2020?
What the hell is 2020?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If you can find evidence of the same person saying exactly that, it's certainly hypocrisy. If not, that's a strawman.
If you can find evidence of the same person saying exactly that, it's certainly hypocrisy. If not, that's a strawman.
It is definitively a strawman unless you can find a real human who has said both things. Until then, it is a hypothetical creation made to expose supposed hypocrisy from the opposite side of an argument; in short, a strawman.Its not a strawman when its literally a well known fact. They refused to serve a gay couple because they feel they chose their life style. They CHOSE to be gay. The same logic they now apply to masks. They CHOOSE not to wear them, so you cant refuse to serve them!
It can be called whatever it likes. This is not evidence of right wing ideas or of actual hypocrisy.Its called hypocrisy. Both sides do it, left, right and even centrists do it. The right however is particularly proud of their heritage around being hypocrites.
It is definitively a strawman unless you can find a real human who has said both things. Until then, it is a hypothetical creation made to expose supposed hypocrisy from the opposite side of an argument; in short, a strawman.
It can be called whatever it likes. This is not evidence of right wing ideas or of actual hypocrisy.
Extend the standards you would provide to your side of an argument to those opposite.
I apply precisely this standard to both threads, both of which I see as a waste of time and effort by otherwise thinking people.Do you want to go to the Hypocrisy of the Left thread and apply this same stance? Because it'll upset people there.
This is the internet, that is a meme, and a meme that is disconcertingly believable. Because we have seen evidence of conservatives refusing to do both. Both the same person? No. Not on video or audio, yet. But we do know for a fact they have done both these things and that, good sir, is hypocrisy.
I apply precisely this standard to both threads, both of which I see as a waste of time and effort by otherwise thinking people.
It's why - if you go over my posting in both threads - I insist on the posts within these threads actually being on topic; people are not within them to argue a point or to do much more than score points. Point scoring should have no place in political discourse; that it does is a blight on us.
Do you want to go to the Hypocrisy of the Left thread and apply this same stance? Because it'll upset people there.
This is the internet, that is a meme, and a meme that is disconcertingly believable. Because we have seen evidence of conservatives refusing to do both. Both the same person? No. Not on video or audio, yet. But we do know for a fact they have done both these things and that, good sir, is hypocrisy.
There's evidence of the cake/guy situation, whether a meme is disconcertingly believable doesn't equate to evidence or fact.
I dont recall stating it was absolutely factual, but the fact that the right would immediately argue that it isnt and it's not the same is alarming.
Not really. Hypocrisy - or accusations of it - are really what irritates me.So basically the internet is a bad place for discussion. Because it literally boils down to point scoring.
You said "we know for a fact" seems pretty absolute to me.
Not really. Hypocrisy - or accusations of it - are really what irritates me.
At what point in the entirety of history has hypocrisy alone ever made someone incorrect? Not right or wrong, factually incorrect?
By we I mean those of us who can see right wing hypocrisy. I understand that might be difficult for you to also see.
What makes you believe the same people who refuse to accept serving people of a different sexuality wouldnt have any chance of fighting back against the so called oppressive stance of wearing masks?
... which doesn't answer the question I posed.What makes you believe the same people who refuse to accept serving people of a different sexuality wouldnt have any chance of fighting back against the so called oppressive stance of wearing masks?
Not hypocrisy. You can be anti-abortion simply because you elevate the perceived rights of the foetus. Which makes abortion the conflict of two individual's rights. Masks definitely don't have intrinsic rights!Best example I can think of is masks in the US, a lot of my body my choice rhetoric coming from the same people who no doubt are fiercely anti abortion.
I agree that that was hypocrisy.The real hypocrisy is that they want people to consider abortions killing a human life but the government wouldnt accept an unborn child as a dependent when it comes to financial aid. Cant have it both ways.