Condescending Debaters

>>127137223
>Islam is a religion of peace

>>127138053
'uh' 'i mean' 'um' 'um' 'like'

File: 1495308310742.jpg (78KB, 857x921px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 857x921px

>>127137223
I identify as...
Magic Sky Wizard
Diversity is our strength
Cis

>>127138905
"know what i'm sayin?" "social benefit"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdhtuHoif54

btw, i had to make this thread because the latest stefbot caller is a fucking idiot

File: 22262t44hthy655.png (207KB, 500x337px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 500x337px

The science is settled

>>127139832
fuck all. i fucking hate that one!

'you have to agree that...'
>no i don't. go fuck yourself

>>127137223
>actually
>I personally believe
>if you kill your enemies, they win
>everyone is a little bit gay
>all kids of love is allowed (pedophilia)

>>127140504
How old was that fetus?

>>127140504
Oh goodness, oh no, It has the vague shape of a human and has rudimentary musculature. It's practically a full person.
Get a hold of your emotions.

File: 4R0987878.gif (2MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x270px

>>127139832
This, and the inverted irony,These leftists are the catholic church from the 600 years ago.

>>127137223
Not exactly what you want, but the thoughtless "whataboutism" response to anything that exposes the hypocrisy of one making a criticism.

I feel like the morally loaded language most use in politics conceals the core of the conflict. I want to understand the underlying forces driving the conflict, but everyone ignores it and pays attention to superficial moralisms which come after the fact.

>>127137223
Strawman
Personal attack
Dont rape me

>>127140907
You dirty fucking trash, white people have empathy.

Shitlibs always try to sound intellectual by adding "right?" at the end of their point. "So, I mean, 97% of scientists agree that climate change is real, right?".

>>127137223
"Let's face it"
"Frankly"

>>127137223

>"if"
>"settle down"
>"ya'll"
>"okey"
>"dokey"
>"spew soap"

>>127140907
Are babies and toddlers full persons? Are people without arms legs full persons? What's your definition of a full person?

>'you know'
>'essentially'
>'basically'

These are essentially just filler words a lot of the time.

>>127141872
okey dokey, if y'all don't settle down I'll make ya spew soap!

File: 1495405645029.jpg (268KB, 1688x687px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 1688x687px

>>127137223

>>127142422
>essentially
>These are essentially

Stopped reading right there, after I first considered hiding the post due to a fucking leaf.

>>127141898
>Are babies and toddlers full persons?
Not quite, but far enough along that their deaths would be a loss.
>Are people without arms legs full persons
If they're missing them congenitally, they're close to being full. If they lost them due to disease or an accident, then they're full.

>>127141271
>white people have empathy

Speak for yourself, faggot.

>"You're on the wrong side of history"
Which is basically a No-True-Scotsman argument

> No-True-Scotsman

exterminate the greens
thorium atomic now!
end foriegn aid now
charge merchants to prtect trade ships
unregulated capitalism
fire all laweyrs n univerty n below teachers

>>127137223
pls no bully jilf stein
you know she only did it for the shekelz.

>>127137223
No, those are vocal ticks save for "in layman's terms." That one is frequently used by legitimately smart people to break down highly complex ideas for those with a simpler understanding. Not unlike how I had to break down your LARP and call you out as a leftist commie shill begging for a helicopter ride.