Even if my assessment is incorrect, it would have to be brought before SCOTUS and they would have to agree to take the case, which is a choice.
There is that...
There is no "you must agree" going on here.
Yeah, I'm kinda too confrontation-averse for my own good, and internet discussions have a bad habit of turning sour on a dime, so I get a little gun-shy sometimes, lol.
I suggest a few things to take care of "discussions turning sour":
First, more than anything else, people just want to be heard. While there are certainly exceptions, for the most part people just want to know that you have understood what they have said. It is generally more important than being agreed with. As long as you address what they have said in a way that signifies you have understood them, it usually works out OK in the end.
Second, when the above is not true, recognize that each person is going to come to the Truth (or get closer and closer to it) by their own path. Of course some will never make it, because they don't really want to, and that is another thing to consider. You certainly shouldn't work towards appeasement of them. They are stuck in their own hell by choice. You can't bring everyone along on the path towards the Truth. They will either start that journey or not as they choose. You can bring them information, or attempt to help them, but ultimately the choice is up to them, and there is nothing you can or should do about it. Don't let their "bad" decisions interfere with your efforts on your own path.
Third, efforts to investigate the Truth can only be made in earnest. It is only when we let go of the ego's need to be "right" that we can take on that endeavor honestly. As long as you are not trying to prove yourself right for your ego's case, then you are probably on the right path.
It's tricky, because we shouldn't give up our intuition, and we shouldn't "just agree" because someone makes sense. Don't ever give up your own critical thinking just because someone makes a good argument. It's just that you shouldn't hold on to your thoughts purely for the "need to be right". It's a perpetual self-monitoring thing, with many likely failures on the path towards mastery (I am far from that end myself, I'm just better than I was before).
So what I'm really saying is, be considerate, and respectful, but don't shy away from the effort to get closer to the truth. Recognize you are on your path, they are on theirs, and it's OK if you don't have Happy Happy Joy Joy interactions as you pass each other by.
Even if my assessment is incorrect, it would have to be brought before SCOTUS and they would have to agree to take the case, which is a choice.
There is that...
Yeah, I'm kinda too confrontation-averse for my own good, and internet discussions have a bad habit of turning sour on a dime, so I get a little gun-shy sometimes, lol.
I suggest a few things to take care of "discussions turning sour":
First, more than anything else, people just want to be heard. While there are certainly exceptions, for the most part people just want to know that you have understood what they have said. It is generally more important than being agreed with. As long as you address what they have said in a way that signifies you have understood them, it usually works out OK in the end.
Second, when the above is not true, recognize that each person is going to come to the Truth (or get closer and closer to it) by their own path. Of course some will never make it, because they don't really want to, and that is another thing to consider. You certainly shouldn't work towards appeasement of them. They are stuck in their own hell by choice. You can't bring everyone along on the path towards the Truth. They will either start that journey or not as they choose. You can bring them information, or attempt to help them, but ultimately the choice is up to them, and there is nothing you can or should do about it. Don't let their "bad" decisions interfere with your efforts on your own path.
Third, efforts to investigate the Truth can only be made in earnest. It is only when we let go of the ego's need to be "right" that we can take on that endeavor honestly. As long as you are not trying to prove yourself right for your ego's case, then you are probably on the right path.
It's tricky, because we shouldn't give up our intuition, and we shouldn't "just agree" because someone makes sense. Don't ever give up your own critical thinking just because someone makes a good argument. It's just that you shouldn't hold on to your thoughts purely for the "need to be right". It's a perpetual self-monitoring thing, with many likely failures on the path towards mastery (I am far from that end myself, I'm just better than I was before).
So what I'm really saying is, be considerate, and respectful, but don't shy away from the effort to get closer to the truth. Recognize you are on your path, they are on theirs, and it's OK if you don't have Happy Happy Joy Joy interactions as you pass each other by.
I know it logically, but by my own hand I've set myself on a course of confrontation avoidance.
Maybe I'll get there someday, but it's just hard to break bad habits, you know? lol
I think everyone can appreciate that statement. Just don't let it interfere with such excellent rebuttals!