*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[wufwugy]

If kids are made to suffer unnecessarily is there a way to protest it without being a pedophrast?

Sure. Pedophrasty is an appeal to emotion. To not be a pedophrast, one must based argument on reason and evidence without using the emotional component that suspends reason.

[Poopadoop]

Sure. Pedophrasty is an appeal to emotion. To not be a pedophrast, one must based argument on reason and evidence without using the emotional component that suspends reason.

Sure, but any argument that includes the words 'children' and 'suffering' can be accused of pedophrasty, since there's no way to divorce those concepts from emotion. So the whole pedophrasty argument can just be a cop out excuse for letting children suffer.

e.g.

Critic: "It's cruel to make children suffer."

Trumpist: "You're just a pedophrast."

[OngBonga]

Sure, but any argument that includes the words 'children' and 'suffering' can be accused of pedophrasty, since there's no way to divorce those concepts from emotion

What the fuck does "pedophrasty" mean?

[Poopadoop]

What the fuck does "pedophrasty" mean?

I made it up based on pedophrast. The practice of using children to make an argument have an appeal to emotions when it wouldn't otherwise have a good grounding.

e.g., "Immigration is bad. What if it was your child who got killed by an immigrant gang member?"

[oskar]

What the fuck does "pedophrasty" mean?

Apparently if you bring up children when talking about the separation and detainment of children, anything you say is invalid because it amounts to pedophrastry - apparently meaning something like using children to beg for money or use as an appeal to emotion, although I have not found any usage of the word outside of tabloid articles and twitter.

So to reiterate: I take your child, you ask me to give it back. I call you a pedophrast for bringing up children, thus winning the argument and archiving moral highground.

If this doesn't make sense to you, it's probably because you're not an idiot.

[wufwugy]

Sure, but any argument that includes the words 'children' and 'suffering' can be accused of pedophrasty, since there's no way to divorce those concepts from emotion. So the whole pedophrasty argument can just be a cop out excuse for letting children suffer.

e.g.

Critic: "It's cruel to make children suffer."

Trumpist: "You're just a pedophrast."

Everybody agrees that children shouldn't suffer.

Productive discussion will happen when it doesn't involve suspending reason by appealing to that emotion.