that seems mostly right (heh) to me. there are some positions that transparently cause so much gratuitous suffering or have such a bad historical track record that we can comfortably categorize them as "wrong" without much subtlety. most policies and beliefs are not like that.
the premise isn't "it's possible for a view to be wrong". the premise is "no conservative Supreme Court nominee can possibly hold right views regardless of the gender of the nominee" and I object to that premise because no specific nominee has been named.
-
-
How is that the premise of that one sentence? You're adding all sorts of additional context. Where is all the coming from?
-
did you actually read the tweet and the quoted tweet it is responding to? I feel like the context here is incredibly obvious and you ignored it.
-
And I think your assuming all of it. Regardless, it's an objection to a completely different argument than the one literally stated. Focus, people
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
clear enough? holy shit dude
-
If you can't see all the additional assumptions you're bringing to that *literally* one sentence response by Ian, then I got nothing for you
End of conversation
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.