I agree this respect 4 the opinions of others allows true "choice". Note: this attitude was that of my Goldwater Republican family. I'm lib
-
-
Milo isn't hateful though. He's using ridicule and parody as a weapon against modern day "feminism". Atheists do the same against faith
-
In fact I would say Milos largest audience are feminists who flock to disrupt him, making him more popular, and play the victim over words.
-
The point is not what you think of Milo but whether we should ban ideas we think are hateful. Not agreeing on which are strengthens a 'no.'
-
We shouldn't ban ideas. Ideas don't hurt people, people do that. Because at the core hateful "ideas" are the result of hateful people
-
Or people you see as hateful because they have strong opinions that oppose your own.
-
Well again back to "everyone's reality is subjectively true" crap. If feminists see Milo as hateful in their mind he is.
-
'Hate' is rarely a useful accusation.Ppl who justify the idea that I'll be tortured for all eternity for wrongthink rarely motivated by hate
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The UK has more laws against speech than the US. Do you think the UK goes too far? Does the US not go far enough? Where's the line for you?
-
UK goes way to far. No argument for policing speech.
-
I agree they goes way too far. I think the US may go little too far in not policing things like calls for genocide and ethnic cleansing.
-
You police behaviour and actions, not words. We have choices in what we act on.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.
.