anamericangirl - Tumblr blog

[anamericangirl]

looks familiar huh?

[anamericangirl]

Certified Tumblr ancap moment: Preaching about how people need to "give up their comforts to keep their liberty" until you point out that logic should also apply to them, they send death threats to you and call you a fed. Can't make this shit up lmao

Because they can’t defend their ideology, they can only tell you what’s wrong with yours. And any time they get reminded that they have to actually explain why anarchy is better they get livid because they can’t do it.

[anamericangirl]

Oh oh I got one! A pineapple is not a banana so destroying the Amazon to build some condos is fine actually! - there. My point (if you can find one) has just as much in common with the abortion topic as any other pro-kill argument I've seen so far. like seriously similes and analogies are already shaky as rhetoric but you'd think your anons would at least try to make good ones

They can’t make good ones because good ones don’t exist. They have to rely on lame analogies because the actual science and facts of the matter don’t back them up at all.

Like if you can’t show why an unborn baby isn’t a living human being with rights using science and correctly analyzing how human rights work and you think saying “an egg isn’t a chicken” somehow proves a biologically living human being isn’t a person than you already lost.

[anamericangirl]

What about the anon I sent in about no brain activity

The cessation of brain waves are how we currently measure the end of life, not the beginning. The end of life and the beginning of life are two different things and they can’t be measured the same way.

We say the loss of brain activity is death because that’s when we know a person has ceased to function as a living organism but an unborn baby is a living organism before brain waves are detectable. No scientist will say otherwise.

Brain death means there is no more growing or developing that will occur. The person has ceased to be. But an unborn baby is growing and developing at a rapid pace even before brain waves. There is no significant measurable difference between a fetus with brain waves and fetus without brain waves. And we know from observation that they are alive from the moment of conception and their life doesn’t begin when brain activity is detectable.

Are you suggesting there is no difference between a rapidly growing and developing unborn baby and a human corpse?

I’ve never seen anyone justify hunting by saying animals lack intelligence. But it doesn’t matter what justification people give for hunting. Animals and people are different and finding a reason it’s ok to kill an animal doesn’t mean that’s an ok reason to kill a person.

I mean there’s a lot of people out there right now that I would say lack intelligence. Is it ok for me to kill them?

[anamericangirl]

"Germany is better than America becau—" you have legalized rape I don't wanna hear a damn thing

[anamericangirl]

[anamericangirl]

[anamericangirl]

[anamericangirl]

[anamericangirl]

Not putting children on blockers is licherally trans genocide!.. Unless it ends up being just a phase, then the child is an evil detranser who wasn't trans to begin with

I think this is my favorite bit of trans cult "logic".

"Everyone who says they're trans is trans unless they change their mind later then they were never trans even though they said they were trans and met the only criteria we put on what makes a trans person trans".

Do you see why, hundreds of thousands of years ago when we decided certain sounds put together in a certain order meant things, we all kind of just decided, as a species, in isolation, that these sounds should always mean the same thing? Do you see why language only works if you clearly define the words you use and then don't change those definitions every week? You can't lay out one single definition of trans, which is "anyone who says they're trans", and then say "well actually you're only trans until you say you're not trans, then you were never trans at all". Nope. Sorry. By your own definition, they were trans. And now they're not. Which means being trans is a choice and not something a person is inherently born as.

Man, if only there was some kind of criteria that medical professionals agreed on to define what makes a person transgender. Maybe even something that was in wide use until very recently. They could call it something simple and official sounding, maybe something like "gender dysphoria", or something. And you could say that trans people are people who are professionally diagnosed with gender dysphoria. That way, you can say people are born trans (and since we don't know what causes gender dysphoria, it might even be true!) and that someone who stops transitioning because physically changing their body makes them dysphoric (See? The word just keeps working!) wasn't actually trans to begin with.

If only such a term existed.

[anamericangirl]

[anamericangirl]

I mean, cake batter isn't cake, but it WILL be if you give it time in the oven. Nothing but your own intervention will stop it from being a recognizable cake. You made the choice to have a cake when you mixed the ingredients.

And if you’re baking a cake and someone comes along and throws the batter all over the floor and says “don’t worry it wasn’t a cake, just a potential cake” is that ok?

Pro-aborts literally do not have a single good argument for abortion.

[anamericangirl]

If a chicken is not an egg there should be no legal repercussions for destroying a condor egg.

Because it’s just a clump of cells, right? Just a potential condor.

[anamericangirl]

An egg is not a chicken, a seed is not a flower, an embryo is not a baby

> an egg is not a chicken

Correct. The chicken is inside the egg.

> a seed is not a flower.

Correct. But inside it is the plant that will grow into a flower.

> an embryo is not a baby

Wrong. They are whole living human beings from the moment of conception. Ask any biologist.

The argument of “I can think of some things that aren’t other things so by default that means an embryo isn’t a baby” is a very bad argument because it reeks of scientific illiteracy.

Too bad you can’t use actual science and facts to back up this claim and can only make superficial comparisons that do nothing but expose your ignorance.

[anamericangirl]

Boycotts are more for virtue signaling purposes than anything. You won't accomplish anything by not buying from Target, but you'll be able to boast about what a wonderful saintly person you are by not supporting them and get validation from your political team over it.

Yeah I agree they are more virtue signaling than anything else.

[anamericangirl]

Excellent points but you just explained why the government makes parents send their children to school based on their zip code.

I just heard a fantastic argument, imo, for school choice.

We aren't told which doctors to see based off our zip code. We aren't told what cars to buy based off our zip code. We aren't told which churches to go to, which stores to buy from, where to work based off the zip code we live in. Distance may have a factor. Maybe you don't want to see a doctor more than an hour away or maybe you won't buy a car out of state or maybe you won't go to a church more than 30 minutes away.

But we aren't told were to go because we live in a specific zip code.

So why are we told which public school to send our kids to based of which zip code we live in?

It would make more sense for parent's to choose which school to go to based on their values and what they want for their kids. People advocating for school choice recommend vouchers or coupons so tax money set aside for education can follow the child to the school the parents choose.

Allow people to chose which schools their children go to. It will help the literacy rate as people pull children away from failing schools, and that in turn helps alleviate poverty. It will allow more parents to home school their kids, which a lot of people want to do but never have money for. It will allow for parents to take their kids out of schools where they're being bullied. It will allow parents to raise their kids in accordance with their values, either right or left, religious or non religious.

We shouldn't have the government telling us which school to send our kid to based off where we live. It is furthering inequality, furthering divides between people by class and ability, and keeping kids from succeeding if they live in a poor neighborhood.

If we care about the least of these, this is one way we can help them break free of the bonds that keep people down. Education helps people succeed, so give people the chance to succeed in their education.

[anamericangirl]

https://www.nexusmods.com/newvegas/mods/71640