Can we not bring that thread's shit over here?
I think it is quite possible to change each other's minds on PD. It's happened before. We just happen to have very strongly-opinioned people, so it's going to be a bit tougher than it might be elsewhere. Doesn't mean we should give up the discussions.
Although I do get sick of the name-calling and shit-flinging ... Can't we quit the "You do not agree with me so you are lesser" vibe? It's cool where it's in good humor, but when it gets in the way of communication...
You seem to be saying that I, and others, should not speak up about things we think are wrong and hurt people?
Nope, never said that.
If I think someone is a bad person who is perpetuating a great wrong, I'm going to say so. Yes, I do think that supporting certain ideologies makes people lesser.
Often, thinking someone is lesser means one doesn't even consider their points, and just goes HAHA AS IF I WOULD SPEND THE EFFORT TO LISTEN TO YOU WHEN YOURE CLEARLY AN EVIL IDIOT. It doesn't always mean that, but when it does, that's what I'm talking about.
No, I'm not condoning being silent about your judgments of someone.
If you actually want to communicate back and forth and hear each other's ideas, the ignoring and shit-flinging isn't practical.
If you don't give a fuck about having an actual communicative discussion, then go right ahead.
How many years of treating someone as an equal in your communication before you think it's fair to come to the judgement that they are intelligent but indulging in willful ignorance and therefore not deserving of the respect you have been affording them?
Is that relevant?
How many years should you hold your bladder before pissing in the bath? Whoever happens to be in the bath at the same time has to cop the consequences even if you feel your long term tolerance had been justifiably exhausted.
I might remind you that you snarled at me and said I was 'blowing my own ass-trumpet' when I mentioned that a study suggesting closing marijuana shops increased crime sounded suss. That particular study was then retracted; what did the insult, the snark etc add to our ability to have that conversation? Based on this I can't help bit think you're foolig yourself if you claim that this response is reserved for people who've long term tested your patience。
Going after the person, not the argument sets the tone. And knowing the history of the argument makes that more effective. I'm 100% with Nyx on this one.
Really as I've followed the drugs threads there's two views.
Prohibition has issues and these issues would be made smaller by ending it.
Prohibition has issues but the cost of removing it as a means to remove these issues do more harm than good (chiefly by normalizing the culture of marijuana and providing an easier and more appealing gateway into potential drug abuse.)
Instead it kind of feels like we go from 'rhwn is a braindead govt lackey', to 'lol imma troll you now' and then calling eachother idiots.