Comments by "Ricardo Cabeza" (@ricardocabeza6006) on "The Disgusting Anti-Intellectualism in the COVID-19 Pandemic" video.

Indeed. This channel’s comment section thoroughly proves that.
3
“If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're misinformed.” -Mark Twain
3
But science also says the vaccine you received will protect you. I thought you trusted it?
2
Don’t be disappoint you didn’t turn into Magneto. Now that you’re vaccinated, you’re most at risk for shoulder injury. Due to the constant urge to pat yourself on the back.
2
Is it a bad time to mention, that David regularly points out that more educated people tend to be Democrats?
2
Would the anti-intellectuals include people that think gender is not dictated by DNA? So much for trusting the science...
1
@mehdihatami3391 I know what XX chromosomes make and what XY chromosomes make. Would you like to disagree with science?
1
@mehdihatami3391 That’s strange. I recall the Supreme Court recently defining the term “sex” in the Civil Rights Act to include transgender individuals. Or do you simply define gender and sex to fit he narrative as needed.
1
@EJ-jx9te This is taken direcly from the opinion of the court, in the recent Supreme Court decision regarding the Civil Rights Act and gender identity and sexual orientation. “The only statutorily protected characteristic at issue in today’s cases is “sex”—and that is also the primary term in Title VII whose meaning the parties dispute. Appealing to roughly contemporaneous dictionaries, the employers say that, as used here, the term “sex” in 1964 referred to “status as either male or female [as] determined by reproductive biology.” The employees counter by submitting that, even in 1964, the term bore a broader scope, capturing more than anatomy and reaching at least some norms concerning gender identity” Even in the landmark Supreme Court case for transgender rights. The defining line between sex and gender is heavily skewed. The plaintiffs, who ultimately won, argued they are synonymous terms. Are you disagreeing?
1
@EJ-jx9te Once again. It is from the court opinion of Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, decided June 15, 2020. It’s available on the supreme court’s government website. It is on page 5 (PDF page 9), Section A of the opinion of the court. “It literally proves my point” No it doesn’t. If you read what it says again. What you’re suggesting about the definition of sex is argued by the defendant Clayton County, GA. They are listed as the “employers” in the paragraph. The paragraph is establishing the two parties are disputing the definition of “sex”. And it explains both parties definition. You will notice your preferred definition of sex is argued by the employers. The employers lost the case. Congratulations, you’re agreeing with the people in opposition of trans rights, in this court case.
1
@mehdihatami3391 So you’re saying the landmark trans right case from the Supreme Court doesn’t trust science in their definition? Interesting argument.
1
@mehdihatami3391 So you’re saying the Supreme Court is incorrect for granting transgender people legal protection from discrimination under the Civil Rights Act clause of “sex”? See the issue here? You want both situations to be true. But they encompass conflicting definitions of these words. You want to say the Supreme Court is correct in their decision in this case, however you will have to concede that gender and sex are the same in doing so.
1
@EJ-jx9te If you were walking a dog and someone asked what sex it was or what gender it was, is there ever an instance where you would give two different answers? Or even balk at the use of sex versus gender? Why is the scenario suddenly different when we remove the human element? Sex and gender have been used interchangeably by biologist for decades upon decades. It’s the same reason Dennis Avner isn’t a cat. I totally support Dennis’ lifestyle, if that brings happiness. However, I’m not playing pretend time either.
1
@EJ-jx9te It’s not a red herring fallacy. We are talking about scientific uses of these words. Humans are animals at the end of the day. As mammals, we reproduce is the exact same manner. You’re simply trying to pretend as if gender and sex have not been used interchangeably for decades, if not centuries, by biologist. And used interchangeably in the English language in general . Definitions are being changed now, to suit a narrative. Which makes the Supreme Court decision extremely ironic, when the plaintiff, who argues for trans rights, states they are the same thing. The definitions of the these words are conveniently being changed at will, to suit a partisan narrative. Stop playing dumb. You know it’s obvious.
1
Dennis Feenstra Your request for an explanation certainly validates the second half of the quote.
1
@channingdeadnight “bow to their authorities” You mean the way democrats did when a chain link fence was erected around the Capitol, national guard was put in place, social and political elites were allowed to attend an inauguration, while the common people’s right to peaceably assemble at the inauguration was stripped away? You love authoritarianism, when it stems from your preferred political ideology.
1
@channingdeadnight So what does science say about political leadership that strips away constitutional rights, such as Biden did in DC? Come on buddy, stay focused. We can talk about economics once you stop avoiding my point.
1
That’s an interesting point. It thoroughly explains why Democrats dismiss a medical expert, like Rand Paul.
1
@AriesRising4444 Would you like to pretend he doesn’t hold a Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) from Duke, for the sake of your narrative? His residency was in ophthalmology.
1
Oh my! You poor thing. You might want to visit the ER, just to get checked out after that kind of injury to your feelings.
1
@bgvo4373 Vaccines are wonderful. Getting one, then professing your vaccination status on social media, purely for the acceptance of others is tribalism. And that’s gross. But at least you followed up with coming here, telling this story, looking for sympathy and acceptance.
1
@bgvo4373 Are you a Doctor? Why is it your job to tell people to get vaccinated? Why do you feel the necessity to give people medical advice? Ahh yes, that’s right. You’re not giving medical advice. The correct thing to say is, “talk to your doctor about getting vaccinated.” But, you’re not saying that. You’re simply attempting to gain validation amongst your ideological peers. It’s tribalism.
1
So the people driving their car, alone, with the windows up, while wearing a mask are Republicans? Because that’s pretty stupid.
1
@robrobbey Oh, I’m sorry. I guess I wasn’t suppose to test this generalized claim you made about republicans and stupidity.
1
@AntTonyPony You: “Highly educated people or so called smart people can be very stupid on the most common things” Also you: “they do seem to be the educated with common sense” ....how convenient.
1
@AntTonyPony But it does imply that uneducated people are smart in “common things”. Which you’re claiming to prefer. While David points out that would be the Republicans. I really just love when the BS from the left conflicts itself.
1