Moaning Meryl

Or something

Mettle

P1: If we are opposed to X societal effects, we ought not to allow Z.
P2: Allowing Z will produce X societal effects.
C: We ought not to allow Z.
@Lux💜 @Deleted User @Persephone

Mertle

Working nights sucks

Mostly cause i can't smoke

So P1 needs supporting arguments

How do we know z will produce x

You literally presume it will

Example society wants to reduce harm therefor trans in opposite sex toilets causes harm

Evidence for causing harm by trans in toilets needs evidence

It’s a probabilistic argument

Sounds like a safe space is needed

Inductive

<:sataniaSmugg:462409546225418240>

It’s not objective because it’s inductive not deductive

The introduction of trans women into traditionally women only centers opens up the possibility of harm to women and discrimination of women concerned with their presence.

In general most societies want to reduce harm

Non controversial

@Persephone perhaps

How

Just by something being present harm is done?!

@Lux💜 Back in a bit.

@Yeetweet69 Lol dyno automod is taking down your comments

I know lol

That THONK server was a noTHONK

caesars legion did nothing wrong

>not siding with the boomers

"DAD PLEASE ITS SATURDAY MORNING"

"***HOWITIZERS FIRING***"

this but with the seatac meme

Hey

@Make others happy =3 post it in <#454978255225749524>

https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/24/sexist-radio-presenter-has-to-host-feminists-every-day-on-his-show-as-punishment-8281123/

🤡

strap in for the clown ride folks

HONK HONK

the ride never ends

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2018/12/26/justin-trudeaus-terrible-new-election-rules-will-limit-citizen-activism/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.fbb9f8e21a30