The Lubricated Slope

Adjust content blockingContent Blocking

dangerthink Rank: #301

next random

Comment

Source: stonetoss.com/comic/the-lubricated-sl...

+460

Views: 11414 Submitted: 12/08/2017

Block User's Content

Hide Comments

Add Comment Refresh (76)

First 2 Last

[ 76 comments ]

Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest

Live Updates: On

Options

asd

#3 - weebtrash#109 on commentsRank#109

Reply+109

(12/08/2017)[-]

Does it even count as a slippery slope if gay marriage and transgender bathroom use are barely connected?

#5 to #3 - beastarro#435 on commentsRank#435

Reply+8

(12/08/2017)[-]

Progressives didn't give a **** about trannies pre gay marriage.

#25 to #5 - youmomma

Reply+6

(12/08/2017)[-]

How did they not care?
LGBT was funded in 1950 and they included T from the start.

#13 to #5 - weebtrash#109 on commentsRank#109

Reply+5

(12/08/2017)[-]

Maybe. But it doesn't seem like the cause-effect relationship a slippery slope implies. More like a "give an inch, they take a mile" situation.

#41 to #13 - anon id: 6e5cd9f3

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

isn't that part of the slippery slope problem is it's gets harder to say no for each concession you make?

I've always thought of the slippery slope being heavily related to the give an inch, take a mile.

#12 to #5 - lordfiscus#215 on commentsRank#215

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

So is it really just for political gain?
Jeebus they're morally bankrupt.

#49 to #5 - hairyforcekin

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

More like they got gay marriage and then moved on to another issue.

#48 to #3 - Riukanojutsu

Reply-1

(12/08/2017)[-]

Youre asking redpanels
hes as bad as SJW on tumblr, he simply has some decency and doesn't yell his argument. They are however as retarded.

#26 to #3 - youmomma

Reply-3

(12/08/2017)[-]

Their only connection is being an "LGBT" issue.
But the problem is, LGB issues and T issues are completely disconnected. I'm still baffled by how they relate at all.

#4 - colesy

Reply-1

(12/08/2017)[-]

yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

#7 to #4 - kalaark

Reply+21

(12/08/2017)[-]

Everything that people called a slippery slope 5 years ago is happening now. It ain't a slippery slope when the accusations are being proven right in front of you.

#9 to #7 - anon id: 275c0e71

Reply+11

(12/08/2017)[-]

Conservative politicians are touching kids and it's the gays fault, gg

#22 to #9 - pingun#139 on commentsRank#139

Reply+2

(12/08/2017)[-]

>Does gay thing
>He's not gay its just another gays fault

Gays are gay no matter politicall opinion anon

#10 to #9 - kalaark

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

>Literally anon

#8 to #7 - shitshitshit#40 on commentsRank#40

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

this

#27 to #7 - snapdragonswitch

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

Lgbt groups actually have a huge issue with pedophiles trying to hide under the rainbow. Once in a blue moon they crawl out and try to paint it as a progressive movement. People round here don't give a damn whether it's a factual part of the lgbt or not because it gives them another bat to bash gays with.

#11 to #4 - dndxplain#139 on contentRank#139

Reply+7

(12/08/2017)[-]

yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-...

#18 to #11 - ninjaroo

Reply+3

(12/08/2017)[-]

Fallacy fallacy - You argued poorly, so you're wrong
Not fallacy fallacy - You argued poorly, so your argument is trash

#21 - archangelking

Reply+8

(12/08/2017)[-]

**archangelking used "*roll picture*"**
**archangelking rolled image**the way i see it
>let them get married, seriously they have a right to it like anyway
>business should have the right to refuse service within reason but a wedding cake is a wedding cake, its not like it says "i love the gays" on it
>people should use whatever bathroom they look like.... you look like a chick, use the chicks, you look like a dude, use the dudes.

being gay doesn't make someone a pedophile, or a scum on humanity (considering funny junk is so fond of traps and das gay as ****)

you take care of your business and everyone else will take care of theirs, let people be happy and comfortable in their skin.

#30 to #21 - wishfulthinking

Reply-1

(12/08/2017)[-]

"it's not like it said I love the gays on it"
no but they wanted this logo on it

#29 to #21 - anon id: 99d0480a

Reply-1

(12/08/2017)[-]

>let them get married

Sure, I can go for that. Tax benefits and all, yeah.

>it’s just a wedding cake

In the Christian bible it says if you join a man in sin, you are partaker of his evil deeds. If homosexuality is evil in the Bible, and a Christian bakes a cake for their wedding, that Christian would be partaker and judged accordingly.
Yeah, it’s just a cake but it’s also just a faith. If Muslims are allowed to work at a deli and refuse to serve pork, Christians are allowed to work at a bakery and refuse to bake a cake. It is just a cake. Why go to a Christian bakery? Why not go to a regular bakery?

>bathrooms
If you have a penis go to the men’s room. If you don’t go to the women’s. It’s seriously not that hard. If you are uncomfortable most places have a family/handicap bathroom. If it’s a place where the men’s bathroom is a single room with a single toilet, then it’s whatever. Use whichever one you want. But if there are multiple toilets then use the bathroom that correlates what goes between your legs.

Yeah let everyone be happy sure, but respect others more. You can do your own **** that makes you happy at home. In the real world, take consideration for the feelings of other people and don’t be an asshole.

#32 to #29 - reaperssprint

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

The only thing with that last one, if you don't know what they have between their legs, it seriously doesn't matter what they use.

It was never a big deal until they made it a big deal, there were no laws stopping a transgender person from going into either restroom. Sure, a burly biker with a long beard would get accosted for going into the women's restroom, but they're not likely to since they aren't likely to "feel like a woman".

Those that want to use the other restroom probably look the part, so who the hell cares?

#33 to #32 - archangelking

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

It would be weirder for me to see a chick walking into the men's since I wouldn't know she's got a dick, or vice versa. Hence why I say go where you look like and nobody could ever know or care. Just how I see it

#34 to #33 - reaperssprint

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

It was more aimed at the anon, I agree with your stance on it. For people that want to be treated like their desired gender, they put a lot of effort into being treated differently for that gender.

#44 to #34 - archangelking

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

my apologies, replied to the wrong comment

#42 to #29 - tomthehippie

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

Only, you are completely wrong on how that verse applies. Joining in on the "sin" in this case would be actively participating in the marriage. Like getting married to a guy. Or performing the ceremony.

Providing foodstuffs for an event does not make you an active participant in the event itself.

This would be equivalent to arguing that if I sell markers and poster board to a Nazi then I am an active participant in their protest and endorse ethnic cleansing.

Simple logic. So sorry you can't understand it.

With the bathroom one, can you imagine going to the bathroom and seeing a "dude" who has double D tits using the urinal just because they haven't had their dick turned into a frankengina yet? I bet you would be super comfortable with that.

Or how about watching a "girl" who looks like a bodybuilding dude, but hasn't had their bolt-on dick installed yet go into the women's bathroom. Bet those women are going to be super alright with them saying, "It's alright, I just haven't had my bolt on dick installed yet, so I can't use the men's bathroom."

Logic. It isn't that hard to use.

#36 to #21 - philliyoMLB

Reply-2

(12/08/2017)[-]

You're the kind of people i hate, you just want to sit on a fence(pole) and make eberyone agree with you and be happy with each other but I'm gonna give you some reality. If i watch my niece go into the bathroom, and then see a 6 foot dude with a wig and lipstick on, follow her in there. I'm going to demand politely but firmly that he needs to wait outside while my niece finishes. If he can't accept that then I'll walk right into the woman's restroom and wait by her stall. I don't care if I'm labeled as ignorant, all that matters is protecting my niece. Do you now see how your dumbass thinking has put everyone in danger?

#39 to #36 - archangelking

Reply+2

(12/08/2017)[-]

Ah yes because all transwomen are burly ass pedos.
Maybe that burly ass mother ****** has a cunt for all you know, maybe that chick that just walked in there is a lesbo pedo. If a pedo wants access to kids there's a ton of easier ways for them to do so without you knowing.

By not letting people use the bathroom of the gender they most resemble, your more likely to have what looks like a dude walking into the girls bathroom rather than him having to go in the men's because he looks like one, regardless of what's between his legs.

#53 to #39 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

I love how you derail the conversation to prove how open-minded you are. Obviously not every tranny is a perv trying to touch kids you ******* dickhead this is why we never get anywhere in this country, faggots like you ruin any sort of debate.

#52 to #39 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

Okay dude, im so proud of you for being so open-minded. Im just telling you whats gonna happen sorry, I'm not a violent ******** so i will never physically or verbally assault any of those tranny people because i dont care what people do with their life like you said. But in reality, someone is gonna be violent, retard. Get your head out of fantasy land.

#59 to #52 - archangelking

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

yes i derailed the conversation by pointing out your counter argument made no sense, sure sure. you claimed that allowing people to use the bathroom that they appear to be, rather than their biological gender would cause an increase in sexual assaults, but it hasnt happened in any place where the "bathroom bill" has been approved. its a false idea built to allow further hatred towards people that others just dont like. please prove me wrong, if im wrong ill retract my comments, but some simple research doesnt pull up anything to support your nonsensical theory

#61 to #59 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

All right dude, my point is I'm trying to protect trannies, i dont know what world you live in where eberyone is peaceful and not stupid. Like you said trannies could always go to whatever bathroom before, so whats the difference now? Well i feel like its being encouraged now, to use what bathroom you feel like, and if anyone has a problem with it, then they are hateful and you are doing no wrong. Trannies are still a very small minority, so no I can't find any proof, I'm just warning of what that law can cause. i dont see how it is such a silly thought to you. I'm just not gonna let a trannie in the same bathroom as my niece, I'm pretty sure a large amount of americans would feel the same way and some of those people are probably stupid violent *********.

#69 to #61 - archangelking

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

So you agree that they've effectively been doing this all along and it has cause no identifiable damage yet you still are against It? I honestly can't see the problem.

#72 to #69 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

Im against the laws that encourage this or make this **** more open to people with other motives. If you can get away with using a different bathroom because you look the part and arent a "pervert" lol then yeah everythings cool. When we start having politicians who've never probably used a public bathroom, encouraging this, and making it seem like some civil rights thing, its just gonna cause more problems thats all.

#73 to #72 - archangelking

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

i never said let everyone go into whatever bathroom they want to, which i think is the source of the confusion. i said go into whatever bathroom you APPEAR to be, regardless of what is between their legs. so if you look like a 6 foot dude with a wig and lipstick, go to the mens, if you look like a trap, go to the girls. Niether of us wants obvious dudes walking into the chicks just because they feel like it, or vice versa, i just want to simplify it. Classify them based on appearance rather than having a genital checker in front of every bathroom

#40 to #39 - anon id: 60183fc4

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

>Refer to one specific example
>OMG HOW DARE YOU DISAGREE WITH ME YOU THINK ALL TRANNIES ARE GIANT PEDOS

Yeah this is why everyone thinks you're a ******* retard.

#45 to #40 - archangelking

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

**archangelking used "*roll picture*"**
**archangelking rolled image**yes everyone thinks im a retard for trying to find a way for this to make everyone happy

#54 to #45 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

You can't make everyone happy you ******* retard, we don't live in fantasy world. Why dont we make porn illegal that will make a lot of people happy, are you fine with that?

#60 to #54 - archangelking

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

So who gets to decide who gets to be happy? you? i certainly hope not.

#62 to #60 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

You ever heard of economic reasoning? Also, are you much of a politics person? I'm not trying to talk **** but if a politician said what you just did, i would call him spineless.

#68 to #62 - archangelking

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

No I'm not a politician, just a guy sitting at home with the foolish and fragile hope that maybe one day we can all get along

#70 to #68 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

We can all be tolerant and you should and can expect people to be tolerant as well, but you can't force progress or force people to be accepting. People can tolerate but they don't have to accept.

#75 to #70 - archangelking

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

i would hardly call this forcing progress but that's beside the point, being someone who hopes for a semblance of peace instead of fights at every issue doesn't make me a "******* retard". foolish? yes. setting myself up for disappointment? yes.
hopeful? most certainly, and honestly i think that's all we need

#17 - sabanknight

Reply+5

(12/08/2017)[-]

State enforced Homosexuality

#31 - onceman

Reply-1

(12/08/2017)[-]

A slippery slope into becoming a bigot? Cause all I see is one thoroughly one dimensional minded dude.

#35 to #31 - philliyoMLB

Reply+4

(12/08/2017)[-]

You're the kind of fag who doesnt like dick huh?

#19 - ninjaroo

Reply+4

(12/08/2017)[-]

>Thing happens
>Existing anti discrimination law used as intended
>Unrelated thing happens
>Clearly, things are getting worse and child rape is next

#38 to #19 - philliyoMLB

Reply-3

(12/08/2017)[-]

Literally took away religious liberties so some fags can have a wedding cake. I'm not a fan of this post but what was done to those christian bakers was ****** up.

#43 to #38 - tomthehippie

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

Do you not understand anti-discrimination laws? If you are a public business then you can not, full stop, deny service to someone due to their skin color, gender identity, sexuality, religion, or country of origin.

This is the law of the land. If you don't like it, then move to a country where it isn't.

#55 to #43 - helterskeleton

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

******* thank you.

#57 to #38 - ninjaroo

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

"Literally took away religious liberties"
It's not a liberty you have as a business owner in the first place. Nothing was taken, that's just how it already was.

Now sure, you might think that's a bad thing. I think that's a dickhead opinion, but you're entitled to it. But however you feel about it, that doesn't change that blaming it on LGBT is dumb since it came first.

#2 - puckeringsphincter

Reply+4

(12/08/2017)[-]

**puckeringsphincter used "*roll 1, cah question*"**
**puckeringsphincter rolls What's Teach for America using to inspire inner city students to succeed?**

#6 to #2 - PenguinsOfMars

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

**PenguinsOfMars used "*roll 1, cah answer*"**
**PenguinsOfMars rolls Coat hanger abortions.**

#14 - chaoticlaw

Reply+2

(12/08/2017)[-]

Put it in the channel, ya git.

#20 - captainprincess#278 on commentsRank#278

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

panel 1
yes true
panel 2
yes 2
panel 3
yes true
panel 4
molesting children has no relation to the other 3 things

#37 to #20 - philliyoMLB

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

I just think when we let people slide for certain things "because they're gay" then sick people will take advantage of that to get their sick kicks and it will also make the gay community look bad.

#58 to #37 - captainprincess#278 on commentsRank#278

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

Yeah but
who has actually ben let slide for anything on those grounds

and dont say kevin spacey because he absolutely has not

#63 to #58 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

Well I'm just saying that's the point of this post, i don't think its that crazy of a thought.

#64 to #63 - captainprincess#278 on commentsRank#278

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

Its not a crazy thought
Its just that it has, as far as Im aware, no basis in reality

#65 to #64 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

Well three of thos panels already happened/happening.

#66 to #65 - captainprincess#278 on commentsRank#278

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

Still waiting on the connecting thread
They arguably have no connection to eachother let alone the fourth

#67 to #66 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

Yes the fourth one is stupid, this whole thing is stupid, but i think we have the potential of slising down that way. I mean does the media not glorify gays and only make them sesm pure? After every mass shooting with a white guy in america the media starts shooting out stories saying we have a mental health problem in white America (i agree), or why are so many mass shooters white? But when a gay mexican shot up a night club, no mention by the media of mental health in the gay community, or why did it take so long for cops to get there? But it went away quickly because they have some agenda im not aware of. Thats the best point i got while ******** i guess.

#71 to #67 - captainprincess#278 on commentsRank#278

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

Well so what? What's potential got on a complete lack of connecting causation?
No, no I dont see the media glorifying gays and only making them seem pure. I see more media crying about them and spreading fear and paranoia about some massive agenda because the only people Ive seen on the media speak positively about gays are ******* lunatics who only sew credibility with other lunatics. The only formal support for all gays as a group Ive seen from the media has been in the wake of some incident or other where some gays got rough or unpleasant treatment, and it was documented and spread to the media. I dont see these constant propaganda campaigns Ive heard so much about. I wish I'd seen them because they sound like a paranoid fantasy at this point.

Ive not heard the media mention mental health at all, in any community, ******* ever so I dont know why exactly the gay community has to be the ones to hoist the banner of mental health now. How many STRAIGHT shooters cause people to question the mental health of STRAIGHT people? None that I know of. Even in the looneyest circles seen by the public of loopy straight-white-cis-men-guilt cults of the left have I heard anyone ever question the mental health of all straight people as a group. Only recently have even been looked at AS a group.

And its wrong to do that. So what I dont get is why its ONLY wrong to do that to straight people.

Its not like the left have made an appealing case for groupthink, using it to sow bigotry and fear, so why is it still fine and acceptable to apply that to every other group, still?

#74 to #71 - philliyoMLB

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

First off, we must be seeing different media lol i see it all the time, i mean **** nbc spent like half an hour about some trannie city legislator that got elected, it was news just because hes a tranny. I'll remember to screencap some articles next time for you. Let's forget the media since we are watching two different types apparently, but in my opinion, i think there is a huge mental health issue in middle class whites and mostly males. I know that's generalizing a whole group, but i just think we need to have mental health check ups in this country just as frequent as we go see a doctor. I also think that we mask some people's mental health problems by just labeling them as gay. I'm not trying to go all pence, or say that being gay is fake, i just think it's a symptom of deeper more serious underlying mental problems. Do i think every gay person has mental problems? No, but i think every gay person should see a mental health expert out of their own will, to make sure they understand themselves and their sexuality completely. Just like i think every middle class white male should go see some sort of counselor or professional because they most likely never have before and they probably struggle with identity. I think these ways because i want those groups of people to be healthy and safe. So my point isn't like OP's i think OP has a point with the slippery slope argument, but i personally think we are heading in a direction that is going to leave the gay community damaged. You probably think i hate gays now because of what i say ans because of that we'll let sick people who need professional help slip through the cracks. Also, nothing wrong with generalizing a group when you want to help them or cause awareness to something that they could be affected by.

#76 to #74 - captainprincess#278 on commentsRank#278

Reply0

(12/09/2017)[-]

Maybe you should examine what media you watch and why, then. Fact that you find it strange that there are different kinds of media says a lot. None of it necessarily your fault but that you are effectively in someone's bubble of limited and biased information, and you should probably do something about that.

See you and I have a fundamental disagreement.
You want to test an entire group specifically, for a variety of reasons, since you cant seem to trust them to be ordinary people. Your reason for not trusting them is because OTHER people talk about them a lot, in your little bubble of someone else's design.

If you're one to believe in agendas and propaganda then from where I stand you look like your'e drowning in it, just not the kind you think you see.

Me, I see people of all sexualities, all creeds, all races and all walks of life having a variety of problems and mental health issues, and as a result of seeing that Ive come to believe mental health is an everyone issue, and on principle should be treated that way.

If you believe in slippery slopes even remotely, then you MUST see the one you're stood at the edge of right now with this talk.

And yes, there is always something wrong with generalizing a group. Always. Now its not always something thats grave and heinous and should be avoided at all costs, but there is ALWAYS something wrong with it.

The amount of information and accuracy you lose, that you sacrifice when generalizing is always significant, and is the exact BANE of mental health, which requires very accurate and specific treatments for individuals, whose issues are always varied and uniquely complicated.

You claim you want to cast a net to help people but the way you talk about it you dont seem to display much care for the people youre trying to help, you seem much more like youre trying to put a specific group you dont trust through a checklist so you dont have to be scared of them, because you suspect each and every one of them of being affected by this mysterious ailment someone keeps telling you about.

I dont believe, typically, in slippery slopes. But you make for a compelling example.

#23 to #20 - lawxyuno#153 on commentsRank#153

Reply-6

(12/08/2017)[-]

yes.

yes it has.

thats why we call it slippery slope.

#28 to #23 - captainprincess#278 on commentsRank#278

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

not a single thing whatsoever

#15 - arcamean#406 on commentsRank#406

Reply+1

(12/08/2017)[-]

I know they're not the same people demanding these things but at the same time I also kinda stopped caring who said it a long time ago. I shudder to think what the "progressives" will push through in 10-20 years time. Wouldn't surprise me if public masturbation was decriminalized even in areas that children visit.

First 2 Last

[ 76 comments ]

Add Comment