Berate

Violent

Kinda different things.

I fixed it for your overly-semantical ass

Now we're talking.

Disliking someone because they neglect medical treatments for their children isn't exactly outlandish.

Why does every defender have to assume I even want fucking children?! Fuck. That. Shit. And. Fuck. Your. Vaccines.

If you don't want kids then that's great.

Yes it is!👌

He's not complimenting you. Quite the opposite.

Not really. Mercian-Webster defines violence as:

Definition of violence 1 a : the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy

b : an instance of violent treatment or procedure

2: injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage

3a : intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or force the violence of the storm

b : vehement feeling or expression : fervor; also : an instance of such action or feeling

c : a clashing or jarring quality : discordance

4: undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)

ya know?

OP edited their post because of me.

So no.

Logical fallacy.

Which one?

I pointed out a problem, OP fixed it - Problem solved.

Op's submission to your assumed authority on the definition does not have any relevance.

He failed to check your definition of the word. I did not.

It means they agreed I was right.

So what was the logical fallacy?

But their agreement is not relevant to the discussion between us.

You stated there was a difference between violence and being berated. I supplied evidence to the contrary. The burden of proof is on you ATM because your semantic tricks fooled OP.

To answer your question, I feel you're using false attribution here:

The fallacy of a false attribution occurs when an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased, or fabricated source in support of an argument.

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof

^{HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 74673}

Holy shit your not right about anything, shut the fuck up. I changed it because after looking it up, I figured "attacked" fit better under the context of violence. Besides, this is what you fuckers do, you play semantics as a distraction from the topic at hand, or as a means to berate someone.

You fixed your post due to me.

:-)

Damn you're sad, why do you frequent this sub? Is it to berate people discussing controversial subjects? You obviously add nothing of substance to these conversations. Front page is a place of propaganda and toxic bullshit, nothing that requires critical thinking makes it to the front page, because cunts like you derail threads. Fuck off.

Usually when I'm proven wrong I admit it.

Rockran I remember when I first joined here i confronted you. You said you liked being right. I took that (with a tiny grain of salt, admittedly) and showed you respect afterwards. I thought you were a human, maybe even a decent one who was quality testing the sub, whether you meant to or not.

Humility is a virtue my friend.

Berate ≠ Violent

I would be cool with anti-vaxxer if they lived in an isolated commune. But they bring their children to places like Disneyland causing outbreaks. Putting old people, people with compromised immune system, and babies all at risk because of their ignorance.

If you want to be part of society, you should put us all at risk for your "beliefs".

Are you fucking nuts?

Are capable of forming a rational argument to refuse any of my claims?

Please link one outbreak of a killer disease at Disneyland that could have been prevented by vaccines. I'm genuinely curious.

Well, let's start with "literally baby killers". What missed vax has caused the death of someone else's baby? The tightest correlation you will find is the flu vax, and I'd bet the farm that you aren't up to date with those.

I'm trying to understand this. Are you saying vaccines don't overload kids with neurotoxins which causes brain injury? I've seen it. Over and over.

Are you responding to the right person?

Nope. Ma b.

😉

VuckVaccines.

Oh good. I was gonna say that.

Don't fucking go to Disneyland if you can't hang.

Ho ho, check out the weird karma on this guy.^

Lol, right ???

Live here, at the Disneyland outbreak almost all the kids were vaccinated, the kids that had not been vaccinated were from Vista, Murrieta, and Temecula. The booster conspiracy soon followed, with mandatory laws placed on kids soon afterwards, no coincidence, timing was spot on. Your counter argument is good though, perhaps you should PR for the Pharmaceutical industry, wait a min....

almost all the kids were vaccinated,

Prove this or you look like a liar peddling misinformation.

CDC surely would never lie.

It's entirely possible that kids from those neighborhoods were exposed to a measles strain from Mexico.

This

Please watch Vaxxed, and report back.

I have. It's classic misinformation campaign. I guess if people can believe in flat earth they can be tricked into believing anything.

Go ahead and vax your kids, just don't force mine.

I don't get it, why do unvaccinated kids put vaccinated kids at risk? Isn't it the vaccinated kids that shouldn't be at risk?

Remember when the German government admitted they take safer vaccines than what is given to the public?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/second-class-medicine-germans-unhappy-with-alternative-swine-flu-vaccine-for-politicians-a-656028.html

I have noticed. Their ignorance is what leads them to violent rhetoric. They put way to much trust in the government.

Ignoring science and endangering people's health will tend to have that effect. Not only do anti-vaxxers do both of those things, they also obscure legitimate concerns with vaccines because they use any shred of information that questions a vaccine in order to justify their irrational and irresponsible views.

Cookie cutter comment here^

I'm sorry friend but you asked a pretty obvious question. What kind of response were you genuinely looking for?

Didn't ask you shit, actually.

I edited accordingly

What concerns are they obscuring? What should we be legitimately concerned about?

It's a medicine that has pros and cons like any other. Much like global warming, there can still be threads of deception and abuse within a good cause.

That was the cheesiest response ever.

Oh hey, welcome to Reddit ultra_peanutbutter! Personally, I'm not disputing vaccines but rather the unsafe additives in them. Mercury has no place in anyone's body.

Besides that, here's a good looooooooooong reason not to trust government mandates whose foundation is laid on the shifting sands of "settled science." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentation_in_the_United_States

These would fall into the legitimate concerns I mentioned. Though I'm not sure what human experimentation has to do with your point about settled science?

It's a coping mechanism.

Vaccination is a ritual, it has no basis in science.

In order to feel better about what was done to us, we attack the minority who are willing to stand up for themselves

Line up.

Just wait until you tell them about certain events that supposedly happened during national socialist germany.

Are you fucking nuts?

Ho ho, check out the weird karma on this guy.^

Lol, right ???

Live here, at the Disneyland outbreak almost all the kids were vaccinated, the kids that had not been vaccinated were from Vista, Murrieta, and Temecula. The booster conspiracy soon followed, with mandatory laws placed on kids soon afterwards, no coincidence, timing was spot on. Your counter argument is good though, perhaps you should PR for the Pharmaceutical industry, wait a min....

This

I edited accordingly

Please watch Vaxxed, and report back.

I don't get it, why do unvaccinated kids put vaccinated kids at risk? Isn't it the vaccinated kids that shouldn't be at risk?