> I routinely see arguments of the type "Argument X is likely to increase prejudice against Trans/BIPOC/Undocumented people, which will lead to more of them being murdered" used against completely mainstream conservative arguments.
So what? Are you saying those arguments aren't true? If so, of course you should make that counter-argument.
Or are you saying that even if they are true, it's more important to protect "mainstream conservative arguments" than to protect those people from prejudice?
So what? Are you saying those arguments aren't true? If so, of course you should make that counter-argument.
Or are you saying that even if they are true, it's more important to protect "mainstream conservative arguments" than to protect those people from prejudice?