35 ms·
It's not a new argument, and is also one used to justify anti-abortion policies, bans on contraception and the like. Wasn't just the religious folks.
by vinceguidry 3y ago
It's not a new argument, and is also one used to justify anti-abortion policies, bans on contraception and the like. Wasn't just the religious folks.
- Sammi 3y agoDon't arguments have context? Doesn't the conclusion of an argument depend on the context?
- vinceguidry 3y agoYes, and I was adding context. Policy positions get all kinds of promoters for all kinds of different reasons. A position can and should be rejected purely on the basis that the 'wrong' kinds of people support it. It can be considered again when the right kinds of people start supporting it. This is how you don't put total rank assholes in power, and also how enormous assholes game the system to get in power. If you own a bar and a group of neo-Nazis come in, you have to throw them out. If you don't throw them out, then they will turn your normal bar into a neo-Nazi hangout. Neutrality isn't an option when violence is a possible result.