this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
-37 points (15.1% liked)

conservative

944 readers
30 users here now

A community to discuss conservative politics and views.

Rules:

  1. No racism or bigotry.

  2. Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn't provide the right to personally insult others.

  3. No spam posting.

  4. Submission headline should match the article title (don't cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  5. Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.

  6. No trolling.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Just a reminder that those who seek to disarm you are not your friends.

top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PizzaMan@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Not defending Grisham here, but it is really odd to see the party of "protect the children" to constantly be doing everything in their power to allow children to get shot.

[–] lettruthout@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A good example of "The Slippery Slope Fallacy".

[–] PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com 8 points 1 year ago

You know why I hate reading conservative news? Because if I wanted to read a fiction, I could do literally anything else with fiction and be happier for it.

The argument is in the first paragraph:

  • MLG unilaterally suspended the 2nd Amendment
  • Nothing stopped her from doing it. (this bit is implied)
  • Therefore, nothing will stop MLG and her defenders from suspending all the amendments.

So, the articles just takes that stupid argument and runs with it

Does that include the Nineteenth Amendment giving women the right to vote?

How about the Thirteenth Amendment that abolished slavery?

The logical implication is that MLG and her defenders will reinstitute slavery and suspend women's suffrage.

Be afraid! Your country is under attack!

Except the local sheriff said he wouldn't enforce it, a Senator implied he didn't support it. That is, the implied premise is violated, and therefore, the conclusion, on which the rest of the article is based, doesn't follow. But it's asserted like it is, and is pure fiction and removed from reality.