She said some of undergrad feminists worried her a bit coz 'Not everything is always about gender.'
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
with me doing as I feel directed: kind of a Star Trek "observe but don't interfere" * directive*!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CBLK08
This is two separate things, I think. 1)Liberalism - people must be able to believe what they like & live according to it if it harms no-one
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Actually the "if it harms none" is a sticky wicket because that "harm" and that "no-one" has to be politically defined but ends up debated.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CBLK08
There needs to be a high threshhold. My disbelief in God could cause many true believers genuine anxiety & distress but can't be helped.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @CBLK08
Provided I'm not stopping them from believing & saying so & living according to their belief, I can disbelieve & say so & live accordingly.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
So you draw the line at intentional interference? For example you do not bring up your aetheism unless it's relevant to a policy issue?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CBLK08
I can and have argued the issue with people who want to argue the issue. I think faith-based epistemologies are terrible ones...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @CBLK08
Respect for reason & evidence matters for its own sake not simply because of the consequences of not respecting them.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @CBLK08
But I also respect people's right not to respect them and not to want to discuss the matter.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
In the same way, I think its fine for religious people to argue for faith whether or not theirs is being threatened.
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.