That's the argument I am responding to. "Children should have the same protection from the law that we enjoy as adults…'
I know they're talking about hitting. I said it there, look.https://twitter.com/HPluckrose/status/925159053256482817 …
-
-
*I* am saying that argument doesn't work because it doesn't stand up if applied to anything else. That's not the justification.
-
It doesn't need to stand up when applied to everything else. It's a response to people who *defend* the striking of children
-
It does if you make 'coz you wouldn't do it to adults' the justification for not smacking children rather than that smacking itself is wrong
-
What? Sorry. I'm not understanding you and need to go to bed.
-
I know you're not!I can't be any more clear.I'd only be repeating myself. Don't know why you bit my head off for saying I need to go to bed!
-
Obviously, because it was preceded by the 'I don't understand you.' Don't be disingenuous, please.
-
Also, I understand you perfectly. You're communicating clearly. I disagree with you.
-
Either way, this is the most boring and pedantic Twitter convo I've had in some time.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.