Damn, that's deep
(media.communities.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (100)
sorted by:
I am not. You just keep trying that as the solution because its the only way that I can be considered wrong.
Here is the exact quote from him. Tell me in what way deserves is used in this sentence wherein I am wrong in saying a child deserves to be loved by their parent. Because apparently pedantic word games is the level you want to bring this to.
First of all, pedantry is the entire point, because we are arguing about definitions.
You have a pre-arranged obligation to love your children as a parent, as a matter of child rearing, initially. That is an entitlement to the child, due to the child's lack of agency, and due to the parent's pre-condition for carrying a pregnancy to term. As time goes on, a child has more agency as it ages, and it must maintain that love with conditions. By the time you're typing away on this keyboard, that love is no longer unconditional.
The only love that one should receive unconditionally, will become conditional, and therefore must be earned, along with anyone else's love.
No, you are arguing definitions. Its pointless to engage in it because you already conceded to the unfalsifiable position of "well words mean completely different things where I and he are from." There isn't anywhere else to go if you are operating from that position.
So you agree with me anyway. Great, then we truly have no further argument anyway. Especially as Tony went a completely different direction than you attempted to ascribe to him that started this.