As a libertarian I would advocate selling liquor to all babies who want it.
Brand New Sentence
Showcasing the brazen and nouveau in English communication.
- Be cool to each other.
- Post title must be the sentence, or relevant portion of the sentence if it's very long.
- Link for context if possible.
- Tag NSFW where applicable.
I'm looking for another mod, someone chill. DM me if you're interested.
Man, I miss the "As a libertarian" guy on reddit. Dude would start every comment like that before saying something insane.
Hilariously redundant.
Praximis_Prime_ARG iirc, the best part was that they'd include a link to a libertarian actually saying that exact thing.
Yeah!!! That's the guy. He's used multiple accounts over the years. Dude was funny as hell.
As a libertarian, I'd also still comment on Reddit.
As a libertarian I would advocate selling liquor to all babies who can afford it.
FTFY
As a 19th century physician I can only agree, and suggest pairing it with a spoonful of soothing cocaine syrup for maximum efficacy.
Objection! They believe that life starts at conception, but not that aging starts at conception! This is why people are not considered 9 months old at birth!
Conceptually, people can also be frozen at any age, which "pauses" or slows their aging (see: Captain America, Han Solo, Dave Lister)
that's a good steelman. but this is why I think the better argument is Hasan's usual hypothetical about this: there's a fire in a hospital and you can only get into one of the rooms in time to save some people. do you go into NICU where you could save a couple babies or to the IVF section where you can save thousands of embryos?
This hypothetical is great as it forces them to admit born babies are more important than embryos, but it doesn't prove embryos are not alive
it's not about them being alive; embryos are alive, that's not even disputed. it's about whether the life is a person. if you think the babies are more important you're already conceding the embryos don't have personhood, or at least not to the degree that babies do.
either case they shouldn't have the same rights as actual people. if you think an embryo is a person then you can't choose the couple babies over so many people. or if you do it's still going to be fun hearing you try to justify it without conceding.
Like I tell a friend of mine who was premature: Do you want to celebrate your birthday today or in a couple months when you should have been born?
If there was a fire and you only had time to save one of these, which would you save: a one-month old baby, or a flask containing 100 frozen human embryos.
Is the fire making me uncomfortable? I might just sit there saying "This is fine" until it's too late to save either.
Or scout outside to make sure it is really safer than inside before discovering it's too late to save either.
Or maybe flip the lever between the front wheels and back wheels going over the switch for some multi-track drifting--ah nm, that doesn't work for this version of the trolly problem.
I respect your rejection of the premise.
Will I sell booze to this baby? Absolutely.
Will I extend this baby booze on credit? Not in this economy.
What I really want to know: Is Abortionado pronounced like afficianado, and they are an expert in abortions? Or is it like Tornado, and they are a tornado of abortions?
I assumed the first one before reading your comment, probably because I am too feeble to imagine an abortion tornado on my own.
puts on devil's advocate hat
No, because liquor laws don't care about when life began. They care about date of birth. Life beginning at conception does not erase date of birth as a valid type of data.
removes hat because I'm not pro-life
We should not rely on "pro-lifers are too stupid to understand how to refute this" when deciding our views.
How is this confusing anyone? We count age from date of birth. Anything that happens before that has nothing to do with your legal age any more than whether you were carried for more or less than 9 months. This would only become interesting if someone froze a toddler for 30 years or something.
He can buy it, but maybe he should wait to drink it.
My rule is, if you are dead when brain dead with a beating heart then you are not alive until you are brain alive with a beating heart. Life starts with brain activity, around 16 weeks.
I go by the Jewish rule.
In the Old Testament, God breathed life into Adam, and thus he became a living soul.
So until the infant takes its first breath, it's not an actual soul. It is a lump of tissue with potential.
I hope that there are as few abortions as are absolutely necessary, but I will not begrudge a single person their choice to have an abortion regardless of the stage of the pregnancy at which it happens.
Alas, that's not the legal definition. Another reminder that legal is not necessarily ethical, and vice-versa.
I read that cut-off sign as saying
“YAY!
IT’S
TRANSFEM”
and all I could think was “imagine knowing that early AND having supportive parents”
The baby's 30 so it's not that early /s
Trying not to upvote flawed arguments just because it supports my views challenge: IMPOSSIBLE
In this thread: people who are going to lose our liquor sales licenses when we're caught in a sting operation by an undecover cop baby.
I am pro-choice & think that life begins at birth, but this argument is fallacious. Even if you believed that life begins at conception, you could coherently claim that this baby is physically still a baby and cannot safely take alcohol
I'd sell liquor to ANY baby. Drunk babies and toddlers are hilarious.
