Printable View
No...as an example....you pass judgment all the time on here about individual anti-vaxxers and anti-vaxxers in general...You're a prime example of a sanctimonious attitude against anyone and any group that doesn't agree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Badenoch
You are right here-in ONLY ONE thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Badenoch
If we analyze the cause (who started)it is clear , Mr B started the Lack of Tolerance Olympics.
THAT is the only difference between Mr A. and Mr B.
Now,if the "reaching conclusion" part would be low keyed, the wording perhaps chosen to keep two way communication open(chance to turn the "bigot" opinion around)sounding not as a judgement, then maybe-just maybe,the "unasked and unwanted"opinion would be seen as positive attempt to make impact.
Othervise:
Both Mr B and Mr A-excercised their right for free speech.
Both Mr B and Mr A showed zero tolerance towards their target .
Both Mr A and Mr B are in positon where their input is seen as "talking down from a morale high horse".
One more thing ,as opinion:
There is a difference between one making "legally allowed "statement about a group-until one does not generate actions/major hatred/create any kind of upheaval.
The person exercises his/her right to a freedom of speech.
At the other hand-jumping on an individual ,because he/she legally exercised his/her legal right to state an opinion-not sure how to qualify that?
Morale superiority urge? Righteousness-my way is a right way........ anyone else is wrong .
At the end-if one would be PERSONALLY attacked by the next person-go at it,defend yourslef !
Otherwise, stating opinion in a clear,calm and collected way-maintaining integrity of the communication ,is the way of the tolerant.
And,perhaps,excercising this tolerant communication on few and far between ocassions,to avoid presenting opinions as political mantra.
There's a difference. My disdain for anti-vaxxers is not based on who they are, what colour their skin is, their sexual orientation, etc. but what they do or don't do.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
But anti-vaxxers are only exercising their rights and thru freedom of expression protesting against the loss of those freedoms...Quote:
Originally Posted by Badenoch
Your disdain is your problem,...
Like I have said before: "I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It"
note: MOD (FFF))..this is on topic of 'Freedom of Expression'...just an example no need to move it to the Covid forum. :)
What does it matter what a person does vaccinated or not .Quote:
Originally Posted by Badenoch
The person vaccinated is protected if you are protected then why does it matter.
Again is it a case of your vaccination won't work if I'm not vaccinated?
Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk
Since you brought it up thinking this whole thread should go as per ruleQuote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
2. Controversial, religious or political threads deemed inappropriate or needlessly provocative will be removed without warning.
Will kick it upstairs and let admin decide.
For the moment will close thread until decided upon.
closed for now
As gbk says, "stating opinion in a clear, calm and collected way-maintaining integrity of the communication."
This thread would have been closed anyway because it's deliberately non-inclusive and controversial, but I am impressed how you've all conducted yourselves within it. That Fox News link has a broken 404 and I encourage everyone to seek more reliable sources of media referencing.