Finally Some Common Sense: You Do Not Have The Right To Be Unoffended

[Arianrhod]

Rather like the constant state of butthurt among some here...

You should know....

You give me too much credit. I'm not the only one who's noticed how thinskinned y'all are, even before the multiplicity of St. Ben Carson threads.

 

[Mac1958]

Free people, who by definition must ACCEPT the freedom of other, tolerate things they don't like or with which they don't agree. They are FREE to avoid them without insisting that others change merely because they find such things offensive.

What you're describing is the spirit of freedom of speech and expression, but the Regressive Left ignores that.

Once they learned they could intimidate and control speech via PC, they knew they had an effective weapon. To hell with the spirit of freedom of speech and expression.
.

 

[Timmy]

Fine .

When is the right tolerant of anything that's not in thier wheelhouse ?


How about an example ? Just one!

Roger Ailes at Fox hired Juan WIlliams when he was canned for anti Muslim remarks. And WIlliams is a liberal.
There. Take that.

Who is that?

And by the way "anti muslim remarks " are sooooo I the right wing wheelhouse . Lol.

Who is who? Roger Ailes? Fox News? Juan Williams?
If you dont know who these people are you really shouldnt be posting. We assume a level of knowledge of events around here. And if you're in the dark then you have no right to waste people's time posting.

If watching fox news counts as "knowledge" , then count me out !


Ok I actually do Check fix here n there cause their takes are hilarious !

 

[Valerie]

What you're describing is the spirit of freedom of speech and expression, but the Regressive Left ignores that.

Once they learned they could intimidate and control speech via PC, they knew they had an effective weapon.

To hell with the spirit of freedom of speech and expression.
.

lol @ the elusive THEY... sounds like you would rather control THEM.

and what of their freedom...........?

whoever they are, how do they control your speech exactly..?

 

[Valerie]

waa the free market is just so difficult to tolerate...

bigotry just isn't quite the crowd pleaser these days.

"You Do Not Have The Right To Be Unoffended"

This fails as a straw man fallacy – no one maintains that there is a 'right' to not be offended, the notion is a ridiculous contrivance of the right, an inane non-issue.

And as already correctly noted: in the context of private society, and in the context of a free and democratic society, citizens are at liberty to express their opposition to that which they find offensive, to condemn it, and to criticize it.

exactly

 

[Pogo]

Fine .

When is the right tolerant of anything that's not in thier wheelhouse ?


How about an example ? Just one!

Roger Ailes at Fox hired Juan WIlliams when he was canned for anti Muslim remarks. And WIlliams is a liberal.
There. Take that.

"Muslim remarks" are controversial. And controversy $ells.
Commercial media economics, day 1.

 

[Valerie]

Political correctness - RationalWiki


"Short of walking into a conversation, sandblasting the brick and installing track lighting, there is no surer way to announce one is from the 1980s than to mount an assault on 'political correctness,' the contemporary phrase for which is "not being a jackass."



The cliché term political correctness or "PC" is a snarl word usually referring to upholding a social taboo against language and attitudes that might be considered offensive and/or stupid.[1] This loaded term has become a boogey-man for the right-wing, who use it to tar anything that runs contrary to their own policies, such as letting women out of the kitchen or gays out of the closet.

Ruth Perry wrote in an essay entitled A Short History of the Term "Politically Correct"[2] that the term was first coined by Mao Zedong,[3] but was later hijacked by conservative eclectics who proceeded to overuse it in exactly the manner above described, hence taking all the juice out of it.[4] (Defending oneself with it might be the most popular handwave to dismiss social criticism.) More recently, advocates of political correctness have therefore substituted the term "civilized speech" for "politically correct" in order to boost its image in light of the PC backlash.

In full irony, conservatives have also adopted political correctness widely; trying to justify censorship on the grounds that something is "offensive to Christians," for example, or Conservapedia's insistence on BC/AD to the total exclusion of BCE/CE.

In fact, it's probably helpful to remember that in common parlance anything a conservative would consider to be polite speech isn't PC, whereas anything a liberal would consider to be polite speech is. This is why banning the "f-word" from broadcast is neutral and not PC at all, whereas banning a racial epithet from broadcast is.[5]

As above, passive-aggressive people who defend racism or reactionary views and but don't want to be labeled that way attack dissenters as "politically correct."[6]

 

[The Rabbi]

Fine .

When is the right tolerant of anything that's not in thier wheelhouse ?


How about an example ? Just one!

Roger Ailes at Fox hired Juan WIlliams when he was canned for anti Muslim remarks. And WIlliams is a liberal.
There. Take that.

Who is that?

And by the way "anti muslim remarks " are sooooo I the right wing wheelhouse . Lol.

Who is who? Roger Ailes? Fox News? Juan Williams?
If you dont know who these people are you really shouldnt be posting. We assume a level of knowledge of events around here. And if you're in the dark then you have no right to waste people's time posting.

If watching fox news counts as "knowledge" , then count me out !


Ok I actually do Check fix here n there cause their takes are hilarious !

You're an idiot. Just a complete idiot. I never watch Fox because I dont have a TV and I still know the story here and you dont.

 

[Arianrhod]

Fine .

When is the right tolerant of anything that's not in thier wheelhouse ?


How about an example ? Just one!

Roger Ailes at Fox hired Juan WIlliams when he was canned for anti Muslim remarks. And WIlliams is a liberal.
There. Take that.

Who is that?

And by the way "anti muslim remarks " are sooooo I the right wing wheelhouse . Lol.

Who is who? Roger Ailes? Fox News? Juan Williams?
If you dont know who these people are you really shouldnt be posting. We assume a level of knowledge of events around here. And if you're in the dark then you have no right to waste people's time posting.

If watching fox news counts as "knowledge" , then count me out !


Ok I actually do Check fix here n there cause their takes are hilarious !

You're an idiot. Just a complete idiot. I never watch Fox because I dont have a TV and I still know the story here and you dont.

You have a computer, yet you don't know that every news station has an online presence.

 

[The Rabbi]

Roger Ailes at Fox hired Juan WIlliams when he was canned for anti Muslim remarks. And WIlliams is a liberal.
There. Take that.

Who is that?

And by the way "anti muslim remarks " are sooooo I the right wing wheelhouse . Lol.

Who is who? Roger Ailes? Fox News? Juan Williams?
If you dont know who these people are you really shouldnt be posting. We assume a level of knowledge of events around here. And if you're in the dark then you have no right to waste people's time posting.

If watching fox news counts as "knowledge" , then count me out !


Ok I actually do Check fix here n there cause their takes are hilarious !

You're an idiot. Just a complete idiot. I never watch Fox because I dont have a TV and I still know the story here and you dont.

You have a computer, yet you don't know that every news station has an online presence.

So?
I know the story about Juan Williams and know who he is and Doofus doesnt. Do you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

That you don't have the right not to be offended was proven in the same sex marriage SCOTUS decision,

given that the only real argument against same sex marriage that the anti's had was that it offended them.

 

[gipper]

Leftism and political correctness are brothers in crime. Sadly, many Americans can't see this fact.

It seems many on the left have a religious like belief in their political ideology and those who disagree with them, are to be silenced. Similar to the beliefs of warmers and Islamists.

 

[Mac1958]

Leftism and political correctness are brothers in crime. Sadly, many Americans can't see this fact. It seems many on the left have a religious like belief in their political ideology and those who disagree with them, are to be silenced. Similar to the beliefs of warmers and Islamists.

It'll continue to be an effective tactic until the backlash is large enough.
.

 

[Wildman]

If you are a Marxist and I just offended you, well, that’s tough.

If you are a Marxist, demoRAT, libertard or any of the other slime who are offended by what i say IF I just offended you, well, that’s tough. once more..,

 

[martybegan]

Dang, that dude can whine.

I imagine he doesn't understand that he comes across as a whiner. Whiners usually think their own whines are special.

Considering the students who are "offended" by this usually go running to authority as fast as their weak willed legs can take them, the whining is being done by your side.

 

[martybegan]

He's right . But he forgets that people do have the right to respond to those who offend them.

The "offended" don't respond, they go running to complain about it, or they try to get enough people together to shout down the other side, not discuss with them, or respond.

 

[TNHarley]

He's right . But he forgets that people do have the right to respond to those who offend them.

GOVERNMENT!

 

[Valerie]

That you don't have the right not to be offended was proven in the same sex marriage SCOTUS decision,

given that the only real argument against same sex marriage that the anti's had was that it offended them.

right?



next up.. do employers have the right to not be offended by their employees' health care?





On Friday, the Supreme Court granted review in what is likely to be the hottest-button case of the term. The issue, once again, is the Affordable Care Act; and the question is whether the government, acting in compliance with the act, can require religiously oriented nonprofits to allow their employees to get contraceptive care with their insurance, even if the employer doesn’t provide or pay for it.

The cases, seven in all, are the next front in the battle against contraceptive coverage under the Affordable Care Act. The first skirmish, the 2014 case of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, concerned a for-profit corporation whose stock was owned by a highly devout evangelical Christian family. Even though the business was a retail chain with some 23,000 employees, Hobby Lobby claimed a religious right to have the government exempt its health plan from the “contraceptive mandate”—the requirement that employers cover all medically approved forms of contraception. Hobby Lobby argued that the corporation should possess all the free-exercise rights of its stockholders; those stockholders believe that some methods of contraception are “abortifacients.”

The Affordable Care Act Reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, Again

 

[boedicca]

Milo nails it:

Outrage began at Yale a few days ago, after an email sent by Associate Master Erika Christakis became public knowledge. Christakis complained that universities were no longer safe for “regressive, or even transgressive, experience,” arguing that they had instead become places of “censure and prohibition.”

Since then, both Erika Christakis and her husband Nicholas Christakis, the Master of Silliman College at Yale, have been the targets of a rabid crusade by student witch-hunters to pressure the pair into resignation. This culminated last week in shocking footage of students surrounding Nicholas Christakis, screaming expletives at him and calling for his resignation.

(Check out the videos in the original article - quite horrifying and instructive).

(snip)

Progressives start to make sense once you realise they are herd animals. This professor had the misfortune of being the old or injured one who slipped out of the pack and fell prey to the jackals–sorry, I mean, stunning and brave social justice activists.

Similar incidents have happened before, on other campuses. Oberlin College was recently the scene of astonishing protests at the visit of former philosophy professor Christina Hoff Sommers, who was deemed to be too “triggering” for some students. But it is deeply worrying to see this happen at Yale, where undergraduates typically go on to become business leaders, senators and even Presidents....[/I]

Only Conservatives Can Save The American Campus. But Should We?

 

[boedicca]

He's right . But he forgets that people do have the right to respond to those who offend them.

The "offended" don't respond, they go running to complain about it, or they try to get enough people together to shout down the other side, not discuss with them, or respond.

The Progs would rather live in "The Land of the Offended" than in "The Land of the Free".