If by average you mean the totality of every human being in America... have you driven through a city lately?
A roof over your head beats a tent that gets torn up once a month by cops
ssfckdt
joined 2 years ago
You're trying to tie a different issue to the discussion here and it's simply non sequitur.
We're not talking about restricting speech at a legal level, we're talking about opposing bad speech with good speech or by cultivating private fora where good speech is encouraged and bad speech discouraged.
You literally jumped down the pitfall of the rhetoric of the bigoted folks that I alluded to. Excellent aim, wrong target.
Now hold on. Nobody said not tolerating meant suppressing. It means opposing.
That.... that's bigot rhetoric, and is full circle to the issue here. "You can't call me out for using the N word because MAH FREE SPEACH"
I agree with you about free speech -- and I would also argue that it extends to forums wanting freedom to choose what they contain.
There's always other forums. Private forums controlling their content isn't silencing. That's not how it works.
The difference between *teaching about* an ideology and *presenting* an ideology as *true* or *correct* or *better*
Like, we should teach ideology -- all of them. We should teach religion -- all of them. Not in the way parochial schools do (as the truth) but holistically, as things that exist.
the early frog gets the... maggot?
Is this a reference to the British guy who built a motorized driveable trash bin?
People are focusing on the image rather than the link. (as have I). Mainly because it is bigger and prettier and-- ooh, shiny thing!
I think he's referring to the conflating of tolerance with acceptance of intolerance that is implied by the image text
Although according to someone else's comment, it actually is even darker than that.
And that "paradox" boils down to the intolerant saw of "you're not tolerant if you're not tolerant of intolerance"
It's a paradox b/c it's not really a paradox, but it seems like one, when couched disingenuously.
But it's like freedom. Can you really believe in freedom if you believe in law and punishment?* But can you truly be free with criminals running amok? So to have freedom, you must restrict freedom of those who would take away your freedom.
* I'm well aware lots of ppl say "no" here
@BB69 the fact that you misrepresent what i said shows how much of a rhetorical demagogue you are