• @Bytemeister
      link
      Ελληνικά
      110 months ago

      Your original question, that I answered…

      They weren’t killed at all because of the laws, which the title of this article is obviously implying. Why does no one cares that the author is intentionally spreading disinformation?

      Let me ask you some things

      The author is speculating that this assault occurred as a direct result of bathroom laws. Not me.

      Why did this assault occur?

      Next question.

      What would be the required evidence to convince you that this assault was related to the bathroom legislation in OK, and the bathroom policies in Nex’s school district?

      Last question.

      Where in the article does the author assert that Nex died directly due to bathroom laws? In quotes please.

        • @Bytemeister
          link
          Ελληνικά
          110 months ago

          I don’t know. The author is the only one speculating about that answer.

          Perfect, you don’t know why Nex was a assaulted.

          I don’t know. But the answer is not “it happened in a bathroom” like it is for the author.

          Now here, you are admitting that you don’t have any standards to measure how true the authors claims are about Nex’s assault being related to bathroom bills.

          Seriously? It’s in the title of the article.

          Quote from the article please, otherwise, it’s Hitchen’s Razor for your assertion.

          why you think they decided to include that bit of information in the title at all in an article about a trans kid being beaten in a bathroom?

          They included the info because a non-binary student was assaulted in the restroom after a pattern of increasingly frequent bullying started shortly after a bathroom bill targeting transgender and non-binary people was signed in to law. It’s important to context to the event.

            • @Bytemeister
              link
              Ελληνικά
              010 months ago

              Quote from the article please

              Ope, and not we’re back to pretending that’s not what they were saying. Brilliant.

              Hitchen’s Razor cuts deep. You can’t quote it because it wasn’t in the article. You’re standing up a strawman, and a bad strawman you can’t even defend at that.

                • @Bytemeister
                  link
                  Ελληνικά
                  110 months ago

                  Sorry, I checked, but couldn’t find “see no evil” or “your side” in the article. Are you sure that you read and understood the piece before you decried it?