• @Rhoeri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      222 hours ago

      Don’t waste your time with this person. They’re only interested in giving smug ethics lessons that don’t even apply to the situation. Maybe it makes them feel superior to everyone? Who knows, but it’s a waste of time either way.

        • OBJECTION!
          link
          fedilink
          -7
          edit-2
          22 hours ago

          Why isn’t it an option in this hypothetical? Is there a gun to my head?

          I guess I’d either try to spoil my ballot, or just sit there with the pen in my hand until they either shoot me or leave me alone.

          • @null@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            122 hours ago

            Again, the question is Kamala or Trump, no other options.

            Can you answer this very simple question?

            • OBJECTION!
              link
              fedilink
              -322 hours ago

              I just did. My answer is neither.

              You’ll have to elaborate on why that isn’t an option in your hypothetical if you don’t accept that.

              • @null@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                022 hours ago

                Do you just not understand what a hypothetical is?

                For those reading, the reason Objection won’t answer this very simple question is because they’re smart enough to know exactly where I’m going with it, and they know that it reveals their position as indefensible.

                This is the Lemmy Lefty playbook to a T.

                • OBJECTION!
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -222 hours ago

                  Of course I understand what a hypothetical is, and I answered what I would do in the situation you presented me with. You don’t accept that answer for some arbitrary reason, but you won’t explain why it wouldn’t be an option.

                  My position is perfectly defensible. This is like asking a vegan “Would you rather eat pork or beef?” and when they reject both options, you claim that it means their position is indefensible.

                  • @null@slrpnk.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    321 hours ago

                    Let me make this simple for the people that might be swayed by your rhetoric.

                    When you throw away your vote, you will still be forced to have either Kamala or Trump as your president after the election. That’s a simple fact.

                    But as a vegan, you will continue to have the option of not eating any meat.

                    Again, you’re not stupid enough to actually try and make that comparison. I’m just appalled that you’re so disingenuous that you’d do it anyways.

                  • @null@slrpnk.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    2
                    edit-2
                    22 hours ago

                    Of course I understand what a hypothetical is, and I answered what I would do in the situation you presented me with.

                    No, you created your own hypothetical and answered based on that. My hypothetical has only 2 possible answers, and you refuse to answer it because you know it dismantles your stance.

                    The hypothetical you presented about asking a vegan if they’d eat pork or beef is perfectly valid by the way. If they answered “neither” they would also not be answering the question. But that wouldn’t make veganism indefensible, don’t put words in my mouth.