5 ms·

Those people are all famous for saying controversial things. It's part of their brand. They get effectively get passes because: 1. They're famous and very succ

Those people are all famous for saying controversial things. It's part of their brand. They get effectively get passes because: 1. They're famous and very successful 2. They hold enough "appropriate" beliefs that minor deviations are tolerated 3. They’re all used to death threats. Many ordinary people don't enjoy those benefits. Like the teacher who was mentioned earlier who wanted "rule of law" and got fired for "racism." Or the owners that pizza shop in Indiana who got harassed by the entire internet for saying they wouldn't cater a gay wedding, neverminding the fact that nobody would want a pizza shop to cater a wedding and that nobody was denied service at that shop. I mean, even those two people are lucky, because their stories got famous enough to generate national media interest. What about the people who don't get interviewed by newspapers after their livelihoods are destroyed for saying the wrong thing in the wrong place?

y4mi 10y ago
i'm kinda stumped what exactly you take issue with here... voicing your opinion in a public manner has consequences. that will hopefully never change, as otherwise the words you're saying become meaningless. don't take a public stance on an issue laden with ideals unless you're fine being attacked by the other side. on second though: considering trumps habit of simply telling lies on air with absolutely no consequences ... celebrities are kinda immune to this effect.
- thehardsphere 10y ago
  I personally am taking issue with parent's claim that the four liberal individuals mentioned are proof that it is "safe" to express potentially controversial opinions, especially when they run afowl of the domininant left wing viewpoint in America. Grandparent was clearly talking about ordinary people when describing the negative effects of "moral sanctimony" on public discourse in America. I would agree with you that public speech should have consequences. I probably don't agree with you what those consequences ought to be -- what sort of "attacks" are appropriate given what is being said in what context. I don't think either of the two ordinary people I used as counter examples deserved the treatment they got for what they said. I think it's bad for society if every difference of opinion is reacted to as being completely intolerable to the point of ending a career. In addition to creating resentment that men like Trump (and also people who are far worse) can exploit, it makes it impossible to discuss other controversial issues in the future. If we care about being good people living the best lives we can, we need to be able to discuss unpopular ideas, because we don't know which ideas that are considered unpopular today will be ones we will later find to be practically useful or morally virtuous tomorrow.

y4mi 10y ago

i'm kinda stumped what exactly you take issue with here... voicing your opinion in a public manner has consequences. that will hopefully never change, as otherwise the words you're saying become meaningless. don't take a public stance on an issue laden with ideals unless you're fine being attacked by the other side. on second though: considering trumps habit of simply telling lies on air with absolutely no consequences ... celebrities are kinda immune to this effect.

thehardsphere 10y ago
I personally am taking issue with parent's claim that the four liberal individuals mentioned are proof that it is "safe" to express potentially controversial opinions, especially when they run afowl of the domininant left wing viewpoint in America. Grandparent was clearly talking about ordinary people when describing the negative effects of "moral sanctimony" on public discourse in America. I would agree with you that public speech should have consequences. I probably don't agree with you what those consequences ought to be -- what sort of "attacks" are appropriate given what is being said in what context. I don't think either of the two ordinary people I used as counter examples deserved the treatment they got for what they said. I think it's bad for society if every difference of opinion is reacted to as being completely intolerable to the point of ending a career. In addition to creating resentment that men like Trump (and also people who are far worse) can exploit, it makes it impossible to discuss other controversial issues in the future. If we care about being good people living the best lives we can, we need to be able to discuss unpopular ideas, because we don't know which ideas that are considered unpopular today will be ones we will later find to be practically useful or morally virtuous tomorrow.