The worst argument you've ever heard
- Thread starter MASTACHIEFPWN
- Start date
Recommended Videos
"Because that's SOCIALIST/COMMUNIST!" or some version of that, where a suggestion is rejected due to the source and not its merits. Mostly hear it from rightwing american politicians that later get parodied a dozen times before you can say "conservative".
Or maybe "you'll regret this when you go to hell!". I mean, honestly, if you haven't convinced me by then, how'd THAT work?!
Or maybe "you'll regret this when you go to hell!". I mean, honestly, if you haven't convinced me by then, how'd THAT work?!
Most religious arguments are stupid. Largely, I think, because the people who are arguing don't fully understand their own religion.
But the best stupid one I heard was "If you don't believe in the Bible, you're calling God a liar."
My response was "The Bible wasn't written by God. It was written by men inspired to explain and define God. It was also written in Latin and Aramaic two thousand years ago. Don't you think it's possible something may have gotten lost in the translation?"
Hi response: "Um...er...God doesn't lie."
Couldn't decide whether to slap him or myself...
But the best stupid one I heard was "If you don't believe in the Bible, you're calling God a liar."
My response was "The Bible wasn't written by God. It was written by men inspired to explain and define God. It was also written in Latin and Aramaic two thousand years ago. Don't you think it's possible something may have gotten lost in the translation?"
Hi response: "Um...er...God doesn't lie."
Couldn't decide whether to slap him or myself...
There's currently a petition about having a gun in every classroom to protect against attacks such as happened in Connecticut...
Which is really freaking stupid when you think about it...
These guns will have to be easily accessible so that when an attacker unexpectedly comes in the teacher can react swiftly and take out the weapon before the shooter can adequately react. It's no use if the teacher has to open up a securely locked container with several safeties and then assemble the weapon whilst the shooter is killing his or her students. And we all know that the combination of children and easily accessible guns never have and never will cause any serious safety issues.
Should they decide to be very extra careful and actually secure these weapons there's of course always the possibility of a teacher in another classroom taking the time to access his or her weapon and rush over to attack the shooter, since clearly the best course of action in that scenario is to rush out leaving his or her students alone to engage the attacker instead of for example evacuating those students whilst they're still in relative safety. Engaging in an open firefight in the middle of a school is clearly the superior option that will lead to the least amount of casualties compared to getting your students the fuck out of there, it's not like stray bullets ever hit bystanders or anything.
Which is really freaking stupid when you think about it...
These guns will have to be easily accessible so that when an attacker unexpectedly comes in the teacher can react swiftly and take out the weapon before the shooter can adequately react. It's no use if the teacher has to open up a securely locked container with several safeties and then assemble the weapon whilst the shooter is killing his or her students. And we all know that the combination of children and easily accessible guns never have and never will cause any serious safety issues.
Should they decide to be very extra careful and actually secure these weapons there's of course always the possibility of a teacher in another classroom taking the time to access his or her weapon and rush over to attack the shooter, since clearly the best course of action in that scenario is to rush out leaving his or her students alone to engage the attacker instead of for example evacuating those students whilst they're still in relative safety. Engaging in an open firefight in the middle of a school is clearly the superior option that will lead to the least amount of casualties compared to getting your students the fuck out of there, it's not like stray bullets ever hit bystanders or anything.
There are some absolute gems here but I've collected a fair few over the years.
"If we don't get rid of the homosexuals they'll outnumbe us and the human race won't survive."
"People are only gay because they see it on TV."
"If there's no God then who wrote the Bible?"
"If there's no God than how come so many people believe in Him?"
"I believe in an omnipotent being that controls eery moment of my life but that doesn't mean I don't have free will!"
"Sceintists have no evidence for Evolution!"
"The media is preventing religious truths from being revealed!"
"What are you, some fort of Communist/Socialist?"
"Americans are great because we discovered America!"
"We need to wage war to support our troops!"
That's all I've got right now.
"If we don't get rid of the homosexuals they'll outnumbe us and the human race won't survive."
"People are only gay because they see it on TV."
"If there's no God then who wrote the Bible?"
"If there's no God than how come so many people believe in Him?"
"I believe in an omnipotent being that controls eery moment of my life but that doesn't mean I don't have free will!"
"Sceintists have no evidence for Evolution!"
"The media is preventing religious truths from being revealed!"
"What are you, some fort of Communist/Socialist?"
"Americans are great because we discovered America!"
"We need to wage war to support our troops!"
That's all I've got right now.
Someone on omegle said they don't think marijuana should be legalised. I asked them why. Their response: "We would have high motherfuckers driving around". Then they left before I could respond.
Also there's the amazingly ignorant crocoduck argument against evolution.
Also there's the amazingly ignorant crocoduck argument against evolution.
Slippery slope arguments annoy the fuck out of me.Just because one thing happens does not mean that something else,often completley unrelated,is going to follow
For example I've actually heard people say that if we allow gay marriage then before too long we'll have to remove the age of consent and legalise beastiality
So by allowing 2 consenting adults to legally marry we'll also have to allow people to legally fuck kids and animals
For example I've actually heard people say that if we allow gay marriage then before too long we'll have to remove the age of consent and legalise beastiality
So by allowing 2 consenting adults to legally marry we'll also have to allow people to legally fuck kids and animals
Someone once told me that piracy is like stealing someone's thesis(as in a document submitted in support of candidature for an academic degree) and then earning the given academic title with it while the one who the document was stolen from(and who originally made it) fails to earn the given academic title.
The stupidity was so powerful that my brain exploded and my will to argue shattered. Good times.
The stupidity was so powerful that my brain exploded and my will to argue shattered. Good times.
You might as well say that if we give women the vote then we'll have to give it to animals.MetalDooley said:Slippery slope arguments annoy the fuck out of me.Just because one thing happens does not mean that something else,often completley unrelated,is going to follow
For example I've actually heard people say that if we allow gay marriage then before too long we'll have to remove the age of consent and legalise beastiality
So by allowing 2 consenting adults to legally marry we'll also have to allow people to legally fuck kids and animals
Criticise scientology infront of a member of said cult, and he will begin shouting "what is your crime?"
the logic being, i guess, that only a hardcore rotten criminal would ever insult scientology.
the logic being, i guess, that only a hardcore rotten criminal would ever insult scientology.
I know! I can understand some slippery slope arguments, Like hobbes said, Giveth an Inch, he'll take a ell, in most cases where we are given some leeway we exploit it to see how far we can go- But this isn't something to exploit, it's making sure a minority gets the rights that were guerrenteed by the Decleration of Independance in the US.MetalDooley said:Slippery slope arguments annoy the fuck out of me.Just because one thing happens does not mean that something else,often completley unrelated,is going to follow
For example I've actually heard people say that if we allow gay marriage then before too long we'll have to remove the age of consent and legalise beastiality
So by allowing 2 consenting adults to legally marry we'll also have to allow people to legally fuck kids and animals
I think there's this psychological thing where people are more likely to pay attention to the negative things than the positive ones.kennyloo69 said:
I also concur. What I also hate is them saying that less men or women will have marriage with the opposite sex and society will collapse and shit. WTF!!!!! legalizing gay marriage is gonna make me love my girlfriend a lot less??? Honestly, the come off as the people who have latent homosexual tendencies for thinking that.MASTACHIEFPWN said:I know! I can understand some slippery slope arguments, Like hobbes said, Giveth an Inch, he'll take a ell, in most cases where we are given some leeway we exploit it to see how far we can go- But this isn't something to exploit, it's making sure a minority gets the rights that were guerrenteed by the Decleration of Independance in the US.MetalDooley said:Slippery slope arguments annoy the fuck out of me.Just because one thing happens does not mean that something else,often completley unrelated,is going to follow
For example I've actually heard people say that if we allow gay marriage then before too long we'll have to remove the age of consent and legalise beastiality
So by allowing 2 consenting adults to legally marry we'll also have to allow people to legally fuck kids and animals
BTW I came here to originally post my own. It's regarding the Reproductive Health Bill in the Philippines which is obviously hotly contested by the Church. FYI the RH bill ensures equal public access to contraception like condoms.
Their argument is that it kills babies. They train of thought stems from the fact that the semen don't fertilize. By that train of thought anyone who doesn't have sex and does not conceive a child is a murderer. They even labelled the current administration for being responsible for all the deaths of unborn children. A representative of the Catholic Church even went so far as to say that the blood of unborn babies will be on their hands.
Also, only in the Philippines, will you hear politically incorrect bishops talking about how a natural disaster that killed 900 people was God's way of showing that we shouldn't pass said RH bill.
Their argument is that it kills babies. They train of thought stems from the fact that the semen don't fertilize. By that train of thought anyone who doesn't have sex and does not conceive a child is a murderer. They even labelled the current administration for being responsible for all the deaths of unborn children. A representative of the Catholic Church even went so far as to say that the blood of unborn babies will be on their hands.
Also, only in the Philippines, will you hear politically incorrect bishops talking about how a natural disaster that killed 900 people was God's way of showing that we shouldn't pass said RH bill.
Zen Bard said:
It is true unfortunately, I am christian myself and sometimes I just have to leave the computer when I see some of their arguments.