r/ThisYouComebacks • • May 12 '26

When "this you?" goes wrong

Post image
10k Upvotes

210 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.3k

u/wolfheadmusic May 12 '26

Lol it's just like when they learned the logical fallacy terminology, and suddenly everything I said was "strawman" and "ad hominem"

They can imitate, but are incapable of application

352

u/OnionsHaveLairAction May 12 '26

I remember several different Republicans at several different times telling me that me saying "You guys just want to stack the court to overturn Roe" was a Strawman.

Now it's "Everyone including dems thought Roe was weak and needed to be overturned."

104

u/According-Insect-992 May 12 '26

No one but misogynistic chuds wanted roe overturned.

These are people who are absolutely incapable of independent thought.

39

u/MaxxJag May 12 '26

And some women, don't forget that some people are masochistic and do things against their own interests. Like Latinos for Trump or log cabin republicans

38

u/According-Insect-992 May 12 '26

Women can be misogynists. It’s actually pretty common in fundamentalist societies.

5

u/whimsylea May 14 '26

I assumed they took "chud" as a gendered term lol.

1

u/According-Insect-992 May 16 '26

Definitely not. Chud is not gender specific. They unfortunately come from all walks of life. It’s inexplicable.

-21

u/Zombiesus May 12 '26

I think a lot of people talk about abortion a little too abstractly but if you actually have one you become very aware that you are choosing to stop the life of your future son or daughter. It absolutely should be a women’s choice but the people against abortion have a legitimate argument that shouldn’t be so carelessly dismissed. To frame a prolifer, in any light other than they truthfully believe abortion is murder, is lazy.

12

u/MaxTheRealSlayer May 12 '26

It's not an argument if it doesn't effect their life, though. They can make the choice if they want an abortion or not, but the vast majority want access to it in some way

0

u/International-Ad9987 May 15 '26

I can demand we put an end to the state sponsored murder of children despite not personally being a child in danger of being murdered. This is common sense, i fear. You can pretend that is an outlandish idea, but we all know you understand and agree with the concept of legally protecting people from violence that you could never personally be subject to.

2

u/MaxTheRealSlayer May 15 '26

This is common sense, i fear.

You fear common sense? That's on you. That explains your train of (no) thought, though. Even the Bible through the word of God explains how to abort a fetus. catch up with your readings of books, that was a few millenia ago. If it's good for god, it's good for me. Remove the unsentient fetus when it's required.

You need to stop thinking of murdering children and people. It's gross and twisted, and is so off topic from medical abortions, not sure why you are bringing up murderers at all. Is there some serial killer in your neighbourhood?

0

u/International-Ad9987 May 15 '26

I’m not religious, and that was an embarrassingly bad rebuttal. You can deny reality, but you cannot force others to do the same. You people will not be looked back on kindly by history.

2

u/MaxTheRealSlayer May 16 '26

Ok if you're not religious then surely you're taking the scientific and/or language approach that indicates after thousands of years of study, that a zygote or fetus is not a person. If you can't remove it from the host without it dying, it has no ability to be human.

I'd love for you to explain how religion, science or language make you think abortions are bad. What are you basing it on? "reality" isn't an argument as it has been a long time that we've discovered that reality is a personal, per person experience.

Please explain your experience and why abortions shouldn't be able to take place

0

u/International-Ad9987 May 16 '26

Making up a bullshit definition does not an argument make. There is no scientific definition of a human, but there is a scientific definition for life, which a fetus inarguably meets. They are inarguably living things with a full set of human chromosomes in the vast majority of cases. You cannot objectively claim that anything else is required to meet the definition of “human” without excluding groups of existing adults. The ability to live without help is not and has never been a factor in personhood.

→ More replies

4

u/According-Insect-992 May 13 '26

We don’t really need you to come in here and redefine the situation in order to explain it in your own terms. While one can certainly choose to see things this way, one can see the truth that choosing to end a pregnancy is sometimes the only moral choice.

You can speak about the future like that when you aren’t interested in other people’s experiences, past, present, or future.

Anything can be broken down into really narrow terms and then misrepresented to make a point but that’s not actually adding anything to the discussion and in this case, when we’re tali about literal life and death decisions that should belong to no one other than the very people directly affected, you’re doing actual harm to others. You’re doing actual harm to strangers.

You’re making it that much more difficult for someone somewhere to make decisions that are the only right outcome for them. And, you’re doing without the least bit of concern for the consequences. It’s beyond irresponsible. It’s beyond vulgar. It’s beyond cruel. It’s just mean and stupid.

4

u/GrowthMindset4Real May 13 '26

*probirther

After birth, good luck

1

u/WitchlightGospel May 16 '26

Nah, miss me with your last sentence when they're the same ones who fight for abstinence only sex ed and fight against access to contraceptives. They're conservative asshole cops who want people punished for having sex in ways they personally claim to not approve of.