sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

All viewpoints are worthy of being CONSIDERED. Once considered, not all are worthy of the same airtime.

---

Thank you! You have perfectly captured the essence of liberalism. In other words, "If you agree with me, you're worthy of airtime; if you don't you're not."

---

I'll note here that you didn't actually ask me what I thought wasn't "worthy of airtime," rather you jumped to a conclusion that it's merely "those who disagree with me." Not so.

There are two categories of views that I would say are generally not worthy of airtime:

1. Overtly racist/sexist/homophobic/etc. views that seek to reduce the humanity of people based on factors they cannot control. Not worth my time.

2. Views that have long ago been debunked by all available scientific evidence. Flat Earthers, to name an extreme example.

In my opinion, the Republican Party has been trending too far in the direction of these two categories in their arguments. I know, not everyone agrees, and I wouldn't ever expect 100% agreement anyway. I'm just making clear that I'm not rejecting conservative arguments out of pure intolerance of conservatives. It's because, in my view, these arguments are not worth my time.

Now, to be clear, I do not advocate that the government actively restrict these people's rights to free speech. But I do think that once the argument has been considered and has run afoul of either of the above standards, I and anyone else are entirely justified in shunning those who continue to make such arguments. I'm sure that will look like intolerance to them, but it's really just considering a viewpoint, finding it wanting, and then moving on to more productive things.

IMO, that is largely what happens when a lot of people come together and share their views and life experiences in a large city (like S.F. or L.A. or NYC). Some of those views don't pass muster and fall to the bottom of the barrel. If those happen to represent most of the current "conservative" dogma, then so be it. Come up with better arguments.

---

That's where we differ. I believe that all views are worthy of airtime. I just don't have to listen to those views that I believe to be offensive.

An opinion not based on objective fact is just Gish Gallop. These days when someone is called to task for expressing an opinion not based on facts they defend their position by attacking the legitimacy of the objective facts that refute their position.

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

All viewpoints are worthy of being CONSIDERED. Once considered, not all are worthy of the same airtime.

---

Thank you! You have perfectly captured the essence of liberalism. In other words, "If you agree with me, you're worthy of airtime; if you don't you're not."

---

I'll note here that you didn't actually ask me what I thought wasn't "worthy of airtime," rather you jumped to a conclusion that it's merely "those who disagree with me." Not so.

There are two categories of views that I would say are generally not worthy of airtime:

1. Overtly racist/sexist/homophobic/etc. views that seek to reduce the humanity of people based on factors they cannot control. Not worth my time.

2. Views that have long ago been debunked by all available scientific evidence. Flat Earthers, to name an extreme example.

In my opinion, the Republican Party has been trending too far in the direction of these two categories in their arguments. I know, not everyone agrees, and I wouldn't ever expect 100% agreement anyway. I'm just making clear that I'm not rejecting conservative arguments out of pure intolerance of conservatives. It's because, in my view, these arguments are not worth my time.

Now, to be clear, I do not advocate that the government actively restrict these people's rights to free speech. But I do think that once the argument has been considered and has run afoul of either of the above standards, I and anyone else are entirely justified in shunning those who continue to make such arguments. I'm sure that will look like intolerance to them, but it's really just considering a viewpoint, finding it wanting, and then moving on to more productive things.

IMO, that is largely what happens when a lot of people come together and share their views and life experiences in a large city (like S.F. or L.A. or NYC). Some of those views don't pass muster and fall to the bottom of the barrel. If those happen to represent most of the current "conservative" dogma, then so be it. Come up with better arguments.

---

That's where we differ. I believe that all views are worthy of airtime. I just don't have to listen to those views that I believe to be offensive.

---

That's right. And if a large majority of people in a particular city decide to do the same, en masse, that is not intolerance or suppression. It's just, "We've heard this s*** before and don't want to hear it again."

Question: one conservative in Off Topic with a sense of humor? Who dat?

This is a sanctuary city for c$nts and r$t$rds.

I believe I just read multiple posts advocating for trying to silence opposing viewpoints in public space. I can admire the sincerity, though I do not respect that idea.

It seems to me, if you're confident in your viewpoints and in your opposition to certain other viewpoints, letting a bunch of "ass clowns" share their viewpoints, it shouldn't bother you one bit and, as you yourself have stated, you're free to not ******* listen given it's a waste of your time.

If somebody says something I think is stupid and not credible, it's my responsibility to tear it down with arguments and let others decide for themselves, not to actively silence them. Or I can ignore them if I think it's a waste of my time.

I'm sorry, snowflake, did you say something? I was ignoring you and your regurgitated talking points.

AunBear89 said:

---

I'm sorry, snowflake, did you say something? I was ignoring you and your regurgitated talking points.

---

CLASSIC

sycasey said:

---

---

The irony of this post is amusing, given the double standard of these rules.

This is such a dumb thread it doesn't even belong in OT. Mods, please move this to Olympic sports or Ticket exchange.