There are benefits to Elon's acquisition of Twitter even for the trans community
(media.greatawakening.win)
SELF-DELETE, GROOMER! 🏳️⚧️
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (59)
sorted by:
A creator of something has every right to define the purpose of what they create. However, when someone creates a thing for others, the people using the thing collectively define the purpose. This is the case with a huge list of things. You have an extravagant way of defending hypocrisy. Openly saying you do not tolerate opinions intentionally held to oppose your own does not make you better than those who hide it. People are free to do as they please as long as it does not harm others.
Only if the originally created purpose contains that intent. If so, then certainly.
Maybe not. But it does make you honest. And it does allow others to make informed decisions as to whether they want to participate or not. Don't you think that's a good thing? Is deceiving someone in order to manipulate them is OK?
But what do you mean by tolerate?
Or what do you mean by intolerance? Is disagreeing with someone's opinion intolerance? The cultural marxists say so, if that disagreement is with their opinion.
To say, "I do not want you in my house to discuss your view of the benefits of pedophilia", is this intolerance?
You are really twisting the concept of tolerance. So, I guess you are promoting the idea that Christian schools founded on Christian ethics are hypocrites if they do not want teachers in their school who teach that there are 120+ genders and that men can be pregnant?
Exactly, and that means people are free to create forums for discussing specific ideas and concepts, and not for discussing others.
Are you OK with someone coming into your home and seducing your wife (or husband) and educating your kids in debauchery? If you object to that, aren't you being intolerant and hypocritical?
In regards to copyright law, yes. In general use, no.
I think words alone are not harmful. In public spaces, all words are acceptable. This is a public space, so all words should be allowed in my opinion. Even the ones I do not like.
Deceit is not good. Intolerance for speech is also not good. The point I was making is that intolerance for speech is not made any better by being honest about it.
No.
Yes it is intolerance.
That is intolerance, but not hypocrisy.
Yes, people are free to do that. Making fun of people who are intolerant of certain words on said forum is still hypocrisy, though.
I would assume there is no consent in this hypothetical scenario, so the answer would be no.
I would like to clarify something. I do not have an issue with intolerance. I am intolerant of many things. I dread the idea of my child being tainted by these crazy ideologies people have going on. However crazy I may find them, they have the right to say whatever they want. My issue is with hypocrisy.
Thanks for the thoughtful and detailed response.
Ok.
Regarding intolerance, I am strongly inclined to agree that intolerance in and of itself is not a bad thing.
I think we might disagree, as I think it is perfectly acceptable and legitimate for a group of people to create a venue where they can discuss specific things, and that it is not hypocrisy to restrict certain forms of discussion that do not align with the purpose.
I don't see anyone on this forum saying crazy people do not have a right to say what they think or express their opinions. What I see is (the forum creators) saying, they do not have a right to do that here.
I don't agree that this is a public space. It is public, in the sense that it is open to the public, but this does not mean that the public have the right to define the purpose or rules here.
It's a private space, open to the public.
That's very different to a public space that is open to the public.
In my view.