The debate "Trees are not trees" was started by
April 5, 2017, 10:40 am.
8 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 12 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
thereal posted 7 arguments to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 2 arguments to the disagreers part.
thereal, afflenawomi, MrLuke, ceedotrock and 4 visitors agree.
diana26, redstar, Mr_Beuller and 9 visitors disagree.
calling a tree as an organisms....Well then according to ur Logic....all living things should be called organisim...hahah...its nt possible
jst like Animals are not animals..books are not books...Sky is not sky...stars are not stars
"Because organisms are what they identify as according to liberals"
gee I wonder what controversial identity issue exists than involves people choosing their identity. is it race? ethnicity? class??? no. it's just gender.
we already established that your clearly too mentally immature to handle abstract thought but just because you can't read between the lines doesn't mean others cant. you know what you meant, as does everyone else.
also, if I were you, I'd be ashamed of the idiotic things you've said in previous threads as well, mr. self proclaimed winner.
you fail in every argument yoy make its just sad. and then when you lose, you bring up statements from another debate which you also lost!
lmao but the funny thing is i never even mentioned the gender of trees, you complete tool! if you disagree, quote me, peasant. Your "extrapolation" was as stupid as you because anarchists and republics arent even on the same side of the spectrum, you retard! i wouldnt be that bothered if you compared libtards or leftists to anarchists because atleast ot would be on the same side of the spectrum but damn you are ine dumb mofokr.
no, you dont.
of course the right doest want anarchy, just like gender identity has nothing to do with plants. the whole point was to be as stupid and inaccurate as your claim.
I know what you were trying to do but once again, youre a complete retard because your "extrapolation" wasnt even accurate. If you were to extrapolate anything, iy would be more accurate to say that LIBERAL aid cells like you support anarchy amd Republicans support totalitarian dictatorship. That wouldve been more accurate, seems you dont know the basics of the political spectrum. What youre daying is the same as saying Republicans are communist when in reality it would be more accurate to extrapolate and say that Republicans are fascists, you dumb f*** and the libtards are communist.
no shit they don't support anarchy. I was demonstrating how stupid your extreme extrapolating was by saying something equally stupid to your point. obviously it went right over your head.
loool a stupid liberal talking about stupidity, youre a joke. no wonder noone takes you seriously lmfao!
"and Republicans support less government therefore Republicans support anarchy." thats also incorrect like everything you shit out your mouth because Republicans only support less government in terms of economics. Socially, they support big government. It is social that prevent anarchy, not economic. even a fool like you should know that.
"also, gender is a societal feature. sex is biological. are plants social? do they have a society and cultural norms?"
quote where i mentioned sex or gender. you retarded child, your liberal autism is making you see things again. goatf***er.
also, trees are not a sex or a gender. they are a multitude of species. can you cite anyone claiming vegetative humans are not humans? although I would agree they lack a gender since they can't identify as any of them. they do of course have a sex.
the amount of stupidity in this OP is mind boggling.
also, gender is a societal feature. sex is biological. are plants social? do they have a society and cultural norms?
no. therefore they don't have a gender. they only have a sex.
and Republicans support less government therefore Republicans support anarchy.
is there a fallacy called extrapolating to absurdity or is it just called being an ass?
please, quote where someone used the term "organism" and not "person"
Because organisms are what they identify as according to liberals amd since trees do not have a brain, they cannot identify as trees and therefore you must use the much broarder term "organism" when referring to them.