• @5BC2E7
    link
    English
    510 months ago

    Some people believe that women should be under the supervision of a man at all times. Not doing so might incite civil unrest. Where do you draw the line? I draw it at no appeasements because unless people have it their they will keep complaining. Teaching them that outrage gets results is a moral hazard.

    • @generalpotato
      link
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      People can chose to believe whatever they want. It’s the actions and the consequences that matter in a society. If burning a book becomes an act of inciting violence, then it should be reviewed, discussed and a law should come out of it as a consequence which discourages such an act. That’s how civilized societies should work which deem equality as a fundamental right for everyone.

      Your hypothetical scenario is just that and we can spend days going back and forth. We are talking about a real problem here.

      • @5BC2E7
        link
        English
        310 months ago

        Ok so in your views the consequences of appeasement are hypothetical. And we should continuously consider what needs to be changed and empower those who commit violence to effect more changes to suit their beliefs.

        In reality the consequences can be more severe than whatever you sought to prevent

        • @generalpotato
          link
          English
          -110 months ago

          I said what I said. Nothing more, nothing less. Stop trying to pick apart my words in an attempt to forge an argument which has no merit.

          • @5BC2E7
            link
            English
            0
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I am content with showing to others how well meaning but shortsighted (due to arrogance or incompetence) policies like what you propose are extremely dangerous

            Edit : and to be clear I didn’t “pick apart your words” that is a very lazy way to dismiss an argument without confronting it. It’s similar to how you advocate for a policy but dismiss the potential negative effects. it’s delusional.