4 ms·

Opinions based on bigotry or reducing rights or "legalness" of a person based off of who they love, what skin color they have, what gender they have are all inv

Opinions based on bigotry or reducing rights or "legalness" of a person based off of who they love, what skin color they have, what gender they have are all invalid opinions. I should not have to debate a bigot and act like their views are worth debating.

capableweb 5y ago
> they have are all invalid opinions Exemplifying my point. Opinions cannot be "invalid", just like a persons taste cannot be invalid. You don't have to debate, just don't engage and problem solved. Others are interested in discussions even around subjects they don't agree on, let us continue being able to use the internet for those discussions.
- tonyp2121 5y ago
  Explain to me how thinking someone is lesser based off of who they love, what skin color they have, what gender they were born with or identify as is a valid opinion. Treating human beings as lesser for being themselves is an invalid opinion and not something worth debating the merits of. You seem to be thinking that tolerating bigotry is acceptable because the bigot who wants to infringe on other human beings basic rights is a valid opinion. It is not. Please read on the paradox of tolerance, because tolerating intolerance breeds intolerance and allows intolerance to take over from the tolerant. Bigots do not deserve fair debate. Any opinion that is based off of infringing on others rights based off sex, gender, or skin color is invalid.
  - capableweb 5y ago
    > Explain to me how thinking someone is lesser based off of who they love, what skin color they have, what gender they were born with or identify as is a valid opinion "noun: opinion; a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." Even if I disagree with the statement "The earth is flat", I cannot lie and say it's not an opinion, no matter how much I disagree with it. By invalidating peoples opinion by flat out saying "Your opinion is invalid", you miss any chance of having an honest conversation with them, maybe with a small chance of helping them understand a perspective they haven't considered before. > Bigots do not deserve fair debate. Any opinion that is based off of infringing on others rights based off sex, gender, or skin color is invalid. Let's say our conversation here was 40 years ago. Then with your mindset, "homosexuality should be illegal" would be what you would argue for, since that was the normally accepted opinion at the time. If I was to try to raise that conversation with you, you would have responded with "that's not a valid opinion, because I disagree so much with you". I'm saying, no matter how outlandish someones opinion sounds on the surface, it's always worth talking about, as otherwise we will never have any change in a good direction.
argvargc 5y ago
You seem as intolerant as the people you deride for their intolerance.
- tonyp2121 5y ago
  I urge you to look at the paradox of tolerance. Tolerating intolerance breeds intolerance. If I am intolerant of intolerant people then that is good. Bigots do not deserve to be tolerated, do not deserve to have their opinion debated, do not deserve to be taken seriously and do deserve backlash for being a bigot.
  - busymom0 5y ago
    Calling people bigots without firstly discussing the view point makes you bigoted as it makes it seem like everything is black and white without any greys. A lot of right leaning libertarians like Larry Elder for example believe that the federal government shouldn’t legalize gay marriage because the federal government should get out of societal issues all together- not just gay marriage, even straight marriage and other societal issues like abortion, what bulbs to use etc. Societal issues should be dealt at the local county/city/state level, not federal level as he founders intended it to be. This is also why right leaning libertarians oppose weed being illegal. Federal government should get out of that business all together. So when Larry says he’s against legalizing gay marriage, those who don’t understand nuance ignore the rest of his comment and call him a bigot. I can quote several other examples and many anecdotal ones too but I think this example is good enough.
dmos62 5y ago
Ironically, that's the defintion of a bigot.

capableweb 5y ago

> they have are all invalid opinions Exemplifying my point. Opinions cannot be "invalid", just like a persons taste cannot be invalid. You don't have to debate, just don't engage and problem solved. Others are interested in discussions even around subjects they don't agree on, let us continue being able to use the internet for those discussions.

tonyp2121 5y ago
Explain to me how thinking someone is lesser based off of who they love, what skin color they have, what gender they were born with or identify as is a valid opinion. Treating human beings as lesser for being themselves is an invalid opinion and not something worth debating the merits of. You seem to be thinking that tolerating bigotry is acceptable because the bigot who wants to infringe on other human beings basic rights is a valid opinion. It is not. Please read on the paradox of tolerance, because tolerating intolerance breeds intolerance and allows intolerance to take over from the tolerant. Bigots do not deserve fair debate. Any opinion that is based off of infringing on others rights based off sex, gender, or skin color is invalid.
- capableweb 5y ago
  > Explain to me how thinking someone is lesser based off of who they love, what skin color they have, what gender they were born with or identify as is a valid opinion "noun: opinion; a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." Even if I disagree with the statement "The earth is flat", I cannot lie and say it's not an opinion, no matter how much I disagree with it. By invalidating peoples opinion by flat out saying "Your opinion is invalid", you miss any chance of having an honest conversation with them, maybe with a small chance of helping them understand a perspective they haven't considered before. > Bigots do not deserve fair debate. Any opinion that is based off of infringing on others rights based off sex, gender, or skin color is invalid. Let's say our conversation here was 40 years ago. Then with your mindset, "homosexuality should be illegal" would be what you would argue for, since that was the normally accepted opinion at the time. If I was to try to raise that conversation with you, you would have responded with "that's not a valid opinion, because I disagree so much with you". I'm saying, no matter how outlandish someones opinion sounds on the surface, it's always worth talking about, as otherwise we will never have any change in a good direction.

argvargc 5y ago

You seem as intolerant as the people you deride for their intolerance.

tonyp2121 5y ago
I urge you to look at the paradox of tolerance. Tolerating intolerance breeds intolerance. If I am intolerant of intolerant people then that is good. Bigots do not deserve to be tolerated, do not deserve to have their opinion debated, do not deserve to be taken seriously and do deserve backlash for being a bigot.
- busymom0 5y ago
  Calling people bigots without firstly discussing the view point makes you bigoted as it makes it seem like everything is black and white without any greys. A lot of right leaning libertarians like Larry Elder for example believe that the federal government shouldn’t legalize gay marriage because the federal government should get out of societal issues all together- not just gay marriage, even straight marriage and other societal issues like abortion, what bulbs to use etc. Societal issues should be dealt at the local county/city/state level, not federal level as he founders intended it to be. This is also why right leaning libertarians oppose weed being illegal. Federal government should get out of that business all together. So when Larry says he’s against legalizing gay marriage, those who don’t understand nuance ignore the rest of his comment and call him a bigot. I can quote several other examples and many anecdotal ones too but I think this example is good enough.

dmos62 5y ago

Ironically, that's the defintion of a bigot.