For a long time it was religion which had the right not to be offended & in many places it still is. For certain religions anyway.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
Now in some places, its ppl with marginalised identities who have the right not to be offended & many are very offended by this.
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Protecting everyone's feelings can't work, protecting some ppl's feelings can only work for some ppl. There is another option & we knew this
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Not protecting anyone's feelings works to large extent for everyone coz we value right to free expression more than protection from offence
2 replies 2 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I value right to be non-religious more than right not to be offended by religious ideas. So I must defend the same right for religious ppl.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Because I wouldn't want religious ppl to claim both as rights - to be religious & not to be offended by the ideas of the non-religious.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
If ur demanding the right to express &live by your own views *and* the right never to be offended by ppl expressing &living by opposing ones
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
...you are not liberal. If you know this &think its a good thing, at least ur honest. If ur still claiming to be liberal, fucking get a grip
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
And this is how I end up spending a day defending Morris dancers (FFS!) right 2 keep wearing their silly face paint as they have for 500 yrs
2 replies 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Good train of thought. Just as science needs an independent arbiter of truth (experiment), society needs an objective framework
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
It seems to be the only option.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.