Boyle5150

Please continue... The lack of "rigor" lies with those who are afraid of what intellectual reasoning might actually engender, or fear that they may perhaps be wrong. "There are certain things I am absolutely certain of, because I will not allow descent nor questioning of said beliefs." GTFO

blah blah blah I know your views, and they have been proven to be "hogwash". Please move along

A sentiment we should all agree with.

https://www.rd.com/culture/christopher-hitchens-on-freedom-of-speech/ " No special circumstances, no emergency, no unforeseen contingency can dilute the plain and straightforward meaning of those words or that phrasing. We get ourselves called (and we proudly accept) a name that has a nice double meaning for me: First Amendment absolutists. Here’s why I like this quasi-ironic term. It commits us to an unshakable principle while it obliquely reminds us that absolutism is what the freedom of speech actually makes impossible. From the predawn of human history, despots have relied on the idea that, quite literally, their word is law, or absolute. Pre-Roman and Roman emperors sought to cloak this in the idea that they themselves were suprahuman and had themselves deified in their own lifetimes. Later tyrants claimed to rule by “the divine right of kings,” an assertion that didn’t end until the 18th century. All modern successors, from Hitler to Khomeini to Kim Jong-il, have insisted that only one man or one party or one book represents the absolute truth, and to challenge it is folly or worse. But all it takes is one little boy to blurt out the inconvenient truth that the emperor is as naked as the day he was born, and with that, the entire edifice of absolutism begins to crumble."

Btw, the PC as understood in the OP is not exactly what I am talking about. The PC that a couple of users itt have demonstrated is what I'm talking about. Being PC is not bad, but shutting down speech is. Let those with shitty ideas and beliefs speak, and then combat them with better speech. Never not allow someone a platform, but rather educate them in the areas where they could be wrong, and sometimes you might find that it is you who has been mistaken.

Would you call the nomination of BK crap? How would you describe our current president and political climate? Get over yourself if you don't think both of those things are indeed CRAP and beliefs can change, and sometimes it takes "offensive" language to change and sometimes it take people who are no longer willing to allow shit practices to continue... ie FGM and other such atrocities. So yes, calling something "crap" can be more civil than trying to be PC and not pointing out that not all ideas are equally good.

"My own opinion is a very simple one. The right of others to free expression is part of my own. If someone’s voice is silenced, then I am deprived of the right to hear. Moreover, I have never met nor heard of anybody I would trust with the job of deciding in advance what it might be permissible for me or anyone else to say or read. That freedom of expression consists of being able to tell people what they may not wish to hear, and that it must extend, above all, to those who think differently is, to me, self-evident. " -C.H.

I haven't seen this... what a pos

to add to that, libertarians are delusional!

Bernie would have won, just sayin

Please point out any "bile-filled" criticism I have directed towards that group. No religion nor idea should be above criticism regardless if you find them to be "bile-filled" The only way to combat bad ideas is with better ideas, which usually come across as criticism. "civility" is subjective when describing language, so what I find to be civil criticisms of religious dogma, you might find to be "bile-filled" The threshold, for me personally, is when people are criticized rather than their ideas or beliefs. I don't find that to be "civil". Culture, is not a people but rather a set of ideas that a large group of people agree as "true" and "right" and "how it's always been". So criticizing culture is simply criticizing the ideas held by the group of people, and not the people themselves.

Take your username for example... what you find “funny for a reason” someone else finds it offensive. And I find that funny.

And everything in between. Jokes are jokes regardless if you find them funny. Be charitable to your fellow human, rather than always trying to be an “I got you”.

You know I love you

As about as much as you find (or are willing to admit) my claims in “the other thread” are true. Lmao!!

Soft bigotry of low expectations!!

Do you even know what’s going on in the rest of the world when it comes to ”genocide”? Are you serious right now? Like I said, do you literally want to see all these things in action in this very moment in time? I can tell you where to find it and it’s not the “West”. Holy fuck

tbf, half of that is true

becoming?? I think that charade has long past

Yes, compared to the rest of most of the world, you have it GREAT!!

see legends response

see above, and then re-evaluate your choice. This is what is called, intellectual dishonesty and or pure ignorance based on a lack of what other cultures literally believe, and practice. Are you really saying that you would rather live in a Muslim society under Sharia as apposed to the West? Go ahead and lie to yourself and the rest of us.

Then I'm thinking you don't really follow with what I said.

dude, it's easier for a majority of "white people" (here), and no one disputes that. But just because someone is white, does not mean it's easier. Can you process that?

and should be second on the list