4 ms·

This is not wholly surprising, this site is full of hot takes of devil's advocates. This arguments ignore a ton of details most importantly the relationship be

This is not wholly surprising, this site is full of hot takes of devil's advocates. This arguments ignore a ton of details most importantly the relationship between oppressed and oppressors. When Nazis are calling for extermination of people, they aren't going after white men. In every example you have, there's oppressed group that have their rights that you completely ignore. Abortion -- women right to control their body (the right that's being constantly challenged) Homosexuality -- do I even need to make an argument here. Religion -- it's not about any particular religion, it's oppressing religions minority by majority i.e Christians in predominantly Islamic country and vise versa. Promoting democracy/socialism -- basically vilifying alternative form of government by people in power by cherry-picking examples (because no one would dare to criticize that argument). My point is, Nazis are toxic and are always vilify and making scapegoats from people who are not in power, because those people can't answer. I don't want to live in a land where it's okay to say we should kill this particular group of people, that speech be acceptable and eventually carried out.

bena 8y ago
You do realize that there are plenty of people, atheists and women included, who feel that abortion is genocide and that the people who advocate for abortion are advocating for the extermination of people, right? The way they see it, a living person was created and attached to someone against their will and now the one who did that gets to just outright murder them because it's "inconvenient" under the guise of "right to control their body". Basically if I took out your kidneys, attached you to me so my kidneys would filter your blood as well, then decided I didn't want to do that anymore, so I let you die. (I know the example is kind of fucked, mainly because there is no good analog to pregnancy). There's all sorts of things going on with the abortion debate that I can't really get behind anyone who frames it as a "simple" debate. I currently side with the opinion that it's a private matter and only the people involved should be the ones to wrestle with whatever ethical considerations that are tied up with it. The decision is too big for anyone to decide for someone else. Regardless, his point isn't that those opinions he posted are correct, but what would happen if a group took power that pushed that view and "deplatformed" dissent. Because they had the "correct" view. No one actually thinks they're wrong.
- DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
  > Regardless, his point isn't that those opinions he posted are correct, but what would happen if a group took power that pushed that view and "deplatformed" dissent. Because they had the "correct" view. Yes, thanks for the good summary of my point. Based on how down-voted my original post was, it appears I wasn't clear.
  - bena 8y ago
    I think explicitly saying you're going to play devil's advocate is pretty much dog-whistling whether you intend to or not.
    - DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
      Thanks, but I'm not sure I take your meaning. I'd be grateful if you could clarify.
      - bena 8y ago
        People who claim to be "playing devil's advocate" are either people who just like arguing for its own sake, or use the excuse to espouse their own shitty beliefs. And instead of actually having to defend the positions they put forth, they claim they're just playing the devil's advocate.
    - DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
      > People who claim to be "playing devil's advocate" are either people who just like arguing for its own sake, or use the excuse to espouse their own shitty beliefs. > And instead of actually having to defend the positions they put forth, they claim they're just playing the devil's advocate. Thanks, I wasn't aware of that meme / idiom / whatever. It's good to know. FWIW, in my OP, my point in claiming "devil's advocate" was to flag that I wasn't trying to advocate any of those individual positions I was citing. My larger point hinged simply on the sheer number of people holding views, regardless of the views' defensibly. I wonder if "devil's advocate" was the wrong term for what I had in mind.

bena 8y ago

You do realize that there are plenty of people, atheists and women included, who feel that abortion is genocide and that the people who advocate for abortion are advocating for the extermination of people, right? The way they see it, a living person was created and attached to someone against their will and now the one who did that gets to just outright murder them because it's "inconvenient" under the guise of "right to control their body". Basically if I took out your kidneys, attached you to me so my kidneys would filter your blood as well, then decided I didn't want to do that anymore, so I let you die. (I know the example is kind of fucked, mainly because there is no good analog to pregnancy). There's all sorts of things going on with the abortion debate that I can't really get behind anyone who frames it as a "simple" debate. I currently side with the opinion that it's a private matter and only the people involved should be the ones to wrestle with whatever ethical considerations that are tied up with it. The decision is too big for anyone to decide for someone else. Regardless, his point isn't that those opinions he posted are correct, but what would happen if a group took power that pushed that view and "deplatformed" dissent. Because they had the "correct" view. No one actually thinks they're wrong.

DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
> Regardless, his point isn't that those opinions he posted are correct, but what would happen if a group took power that pushed that view and "deplatformed" dissent. Because they had the "correct" view. Yes, thanks for the good summary of my point. Based on how down-voted my original post was, it appears I wasn't clear.
- bena 8y ago
  I think explicitly saying you're going to play devil's advocate is pretty much dog-whistling whether you intend to or not.
  - DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
    Thanks, but I'm not sure I take your meaning. I'd be grateful if you could clarify.
    - bena 8y ago
      People who claim to be "playing devil's advocate" are either people who just like arguing for its own sake, or use the excuse to espouse their own shitty beliefs. And instead of actually having to defend the positions they put forth, they claim they're just playing the devil's advocate.
  - DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
    > People who claim to be "playing devil's advocate" are either people who just like arguing for its own sake, or use the excuse to espouse their own shitty beliefs. > And instead of actually having to defend the positions they put forth, they claim they're just playing the devil's advocate. Thanks, I wasn't aware of that meme / idiom / whatever. It's good to know. FWIW, in my OP, my point in claiming "devil's advocate" was to flag that I wasn't trying to advocate any of those individual positions I was citing. My larger point hinged simply on the sheer number of people holding views, regardless of the views' defensibly. I wonder if "devil's advocate" was the wrong term for what I had in mind.