I still think liberalism is defined best by people subordinating private beliefs to universal human rights.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
I agree with you. The key word here is "private". If you air your views, then they are political statements (if you are a political leader)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BristolBen
How much harder do you think he could have tried not to do that? What more do you think he could have done?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I don't blame him. He got ambushed. However, having let people understand that he thinks gay sex is a sin, his position became untenable.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BristolBen
Also, I don't think it did because I respect ppl who support rights they don't think good themselves but we've been here.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
We have indeed and your point is valid. For me, it just doesn't compensate the harm done to gay acceptance.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BristolBen @HPluckrose
If even the LibDem leader can get away with saying that homosexuality is sin, disorderly, etc, then who can't?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BristolBen
Not denying it fast enough, you mean. We must never let ppl get away with not denying their beliefs fast enough.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
His views are now public. It doesn't really matter how they got there. Was it unfair? Sure. Irrelevant now.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BristolBen
I'd criticise the attitude which led to him being badgered & the response which is illiberal.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
That's what we're discussing.
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.