(07-07-2020 10:37 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 10:20 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 10:14 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 09:48 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 09:44 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I thought these where rhetorical questions. Both Lad and I expressed dismay yesterday over cancel culture and the suppressive effect on free speech/differing view points.

Yeah - the only thing I pushed back on was the volume/rate of occurrence, not that cancel culture can go over the line and create/is creating some serious issues for classically liberal speech.

Frankly, there isn't a lot of worth in trying to dive into questions that are posed antagonistically, and where one can tell the OP is just spoiling for a fight.

I would beg to differ that the questions are 'antagonistic'. They draw a stark line in two lines of thought. Two almost mutually exclusive outcomes emanating from the same part of the political spectrum, mind you.

As I noted above, I will remain silent on answers.

I am truly curious how the same side of the political spectrum can move forward with two very mutually exclusive courses of action?

Yes, they are posed starkly and bluntly. Far from antagonistically, mind you. And yes, it is a hard question to answer, I would surmise.

I really want to learn how the left might deal with two courses of action, each of which precludes the other. I want to learn how two perhaps moderate progressives think of that very stark divide that is coming from their side of the fence.

Good questions. And you have destroyed their only shield to responding with politeness. Brilliant.

Politeness is now a brilliant tactic?

With you guys it is. Y’all tend to use that as an excuse to avoid questions you would rather not address.