I cannot tell you how many times I have heard…”There is absolutely nothing wrong with people having different viewpoints/opinions on issues”.
That sounds great and lines up with the 1A but…
I wonder, are there ANY issues where differing viewpoints/opinions helps ruin this country?
Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise
Differing opinions, fine, speech fine, but not actions that violate our Constitution. Think it but don’t do it. Our country does not need changed but about 200 others may. That’s my opinion.
Differences of opinion and ideas are fine and even desirable among non essentials or discretionary items. But Fundamentals must be in sync or else you get…..The USA today.
There can be to much diversity; I’m past the breaking point.
As Commander Rockwell pointed out, every group exercises in-group preference and advocates for their own self interest; every group except white people, that is. With a clever sleight of hand, whites are divided into 2 bullshit political parties in such a way that their interests are never advocated or even defended. It’s pretty safe to say this false dichotomy has been ruinous for the country.
Addon to the wondering…
…and should not be allowed?
It’s obvious some ideas are not being allowed into discussion. These ideas would help our situation immensely.
Hmm, wellllll, how about gay marriage and adoption, abortion on demand, no fault divorce, unlimited welfare, coddling criminals, political correctness, socialism, and on and on and on.
Enough so that the conversation should be shut down completely?
It boggles my mind how often the country litigates the same things over and over.
not exactly what you’re asking but none of our problems will be solved until one side is completely dominant over the other —
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams
Here I thought you’d ask whatever happened to third gender bathrooms. The lockdown solved a lot of pressing issues like transgenders in women’s bathrooms. Now it’s – no bathroom for you. Next it will be no voting for you. See how wonderful life under lockdown can be, Winston?
EC is now Felix?
From the time I served in the U.S. Army, active and reserve 1977 to 1986, I’ve observed this entire nation flushed into the fucking toilet bowl of a turd world country…wait, turd world countries don’t have toilets…shit in a hole in the floor…
What is your favorite color, or what is your favorite food, are areas of discussion where differing opinions are fine.
But when your position is that the government should STEAL from me, DESTROY my rights, TAKE AWAY my freedoms, SILENCE my speech, TAX my income or property, FORCE me to purchase something you think I should have, etc. then YOUR position is a direct assault on my person and my property and MUST be met with opposing force. We cannot have a civil discussion because YOU have already used violence and force against me, while I have not.
This country has been ruined by people believing that violating the constitutional limits on government size, power, force, etc. is simply “another opinion” of how things should be done, having equal weight and validity to honoring and respecting the limits imposed by the very clearly written document.
I think you just answered the question very well. Any debate that has any idea of assaulting me or taking from me has no room for discussion.
When your differing opinion has a negative effect on my life. The media and its campaign of hate have caused a lot of damage. I was trained to fight Communism, not vote it into power.
This is one of those questions where the answer changes sharply based on the applications of definitions.
Saying that, there’s an important concept that must be addressed, namely, good faith.
Basically speaking, under the correct logical framework, the greater system selects the correct answer from among all available options.
As your system of logic approaches perfection, the difference between a group where only one member produces a correct answer, and one where all members are correct from the beginning, approaches zero.
Almost by definition, a group with only correct opinions is superior to a group with incorrect opinions. However, humans are basically incapable of answering anything correctly. As such, it becomes essential to create a logical framework whereby the best answer can be selected from among a plethora of incorrect answers.
Adherence to this logical framework is known as good faith.
By the way, the distribution of scarce resources through good faith adherence to an adaptive logic framework, IS that which is a market. Market capitalism is simply the application of good faith to the distribution of scarce resources.
Under a good faith adherence principle, diversity becomes almost the ultimate good. Because one correct answer overwrites any number of incorrect answers.
But this is where definitions come into play.
Generally speaking, logic itself, is not considered a viewpoint, or an opinion. It’s simply a state of nature, a position on the board. You may have an opinion. You adhere to a framework. The concepts aren’t the same.
Logic can handle opinions that sound, on the surface, to be toxic.
If one side says, ‘White lives are evil and should be destroyed’, we can ask, ‘Why are whites evil? What does it mean to destroy them? What is the best way to destroy them?’, and if that evolves toward ‘We should produce an AI that everyone agrees is better than us, and then continue our evolution, not with white genes, but with the superior concepts of this AI’s algorithms.’ suddenly the other side isn’t any different from my own.
I find that, given the choice, most blacks want children who are smarter and more reasonable than themselves. Most whites want their children to be more objective and friendly than they are. Logically speaking, black lives matter and outright Nazism, should be identical in implementation.
The problem is, the people behind black lives matter (who are mostly not blacks, and most certainly do not believe that black lives matter.) are not presenting their arguments in good faith. Thus, replying that their stated goals are not in alignment with their actions, doesn’t work, because THEY ALREADY KNOW THAT.
In short, diverse opinions makes for a healthy conversation.
Diversity of goods and services makes for a healthy market.
‘I’ma shoot ya!’ Isn’t an opinion, and it most definitely isn’t a service.