I mean, just look at literally anything they’ve done in the past few decades.
I’m sorry what? Can you substantiate what you said about the conservative platform?
thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 year ago
That probably works well for convincing people who already agree with you.
When someone claims “A” and I say “I’m skeptical of this A”, a rejoinder like “Well A is obvious if you look at things” isn’t very convincing.
jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 1 year ago
Also just like more generally if you take “conservative” to mean “keep things the way they are” and accept the way things are is pretty bad for a lot of people, it becomes difficult to ethically support a conservative stance.
EvilBit@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The clear anti-LGBTQ+ conservative stance is no secret. Same with the white supremacy and Christian nationalism.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 year ago
The claim is that the platform is based on wanting to destroy lives. Are you saying that the “clear” anti-LGBTQ+ stance is such that they are seeking to destroy the lives of those people?
I’ve never once heard anyone on the right declare a desire to destroy anyone’s lives. I’m open to being proven wrong, but that would require a link to such a declaration.
EvilBit@lemmy.world 1 year ago
This feels like a bad faith hate-splitting argument. But just in case you’re not being deliberately obtuse, the conservative platform views LGBTQ+ rights, minority voting rights, women’s bodily rights, and many other important matters of human freedom and livelihood as invalid. Just because they don’t explicitly say “our platform is specifically to maliciously destroy the lives of these people”, doesn’t mean the de facto platform is not destructive of those lives.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Yes, I’m very familiar with this image of conservatives.
The difference is I’m asking you to link to a conservative individual or organization taking this stance.
What you consider “bad faith” is me issuing a challenge that I don’t think you’re going to be able to meet. It’s a rhetorical method where you’re supposed to try and then realize you can’t, and then have the presence of mind to realize that it’s significant that you can’t find this thing you claim exists.