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
I think we have strayed way from the point. Do you think we can support rights to ideas but still be very critical of the ideas?
-
-
On that question, but again with the caveat: do no harm. In a moralist universe "do no harm" is impossible because moralism is authoritarian
-
I'm not sure what that is a response to. Do you see a difference between supporting rights to ideas & supporting the ideas themselves?
-
I'm taking it to the next step. Ideas have consequences. People act on them. I support any idea, anybright to have it, not any right to act.
-
That's a different issue and one we can agree on. Actions that harm people shouldn't be legal.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So then I can support the idea but in PRACTICE-- the world of politics-- I must oppose ACTIONS that end in moralism, the enemy of choice.
-
I don't know what this means specifically. I am talking very specifically abt a distinction between right to choice & rightness of choice
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm definitely a "branch" thinker
. I stray often!Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.