There is something pathetic in insisting on agreement from one's friends it bespeaks a mind so pampered and lazy that any form of competition or challenge is a dire threat.
Of what use is such a person to the world at large or even himself?
There is something pathetic in insisting on agreement from one's friends it bespeaks a mind so pampered and lazy that any form of competition or challenge is a dire threat.
Of what use is such a person to the world at large or even himself?
"Agree to disagree" is something that has fallen from the lexicon of many people.
Pompous much?
If I had a friend whose positions were constantly at odds with mine, I would have to consider if his/her other attributes made the friendship worth my time. Some positions--particularly mean-spirited or racist ones--would hasten my departure from the arena, certainly.
I've lost friends over trivial things.
One friend I quit the friendship when I got tired of her only subject - her and her husband's sex life.
One friend I quit when she kept asking if I thought all she thought about was herself. She turned every conversation towards herself.
Another friend I quit because she kept copying me. It became creepy that she was idolizing me.
And darn it all the people I really liked moved away.
Float On: My "Happy Place" is on my little kayak in the coves of Table Rock Lake.
I may have mentioned before that my grandmother practically had an existential crisis because one of my uncles ran for office as a Democrat, and she apparently couldn't bring herself to violate her principles by voting for him. But we didn't shun her because of it. (As it turns out, he won anyway.)
Pompous constantly!
Ultralight's case isn't close to what you're talking about, which is probably and thankfully very rare. It wasn't virtue shunning egregious vice, it was a sanctimonious twit accusing him of "hiding behind free speech". How do you hide behind free speech? To think something like that, wouldn't you have to believe Ultralight to be some sort of closet racist using free speech as an excuse to get his guy heard?
If you use politics as a substitute for morality, I suppose it's possible to formulate any disagreement as racism opposed to your own fair-mindedness. That's a lot easier than attempting to form coherent arguments. I disagree with good friends on any number of issues from abortion to the metric system. Neither party considers the other to be evil. Just wrong. That doesn't mean their "not worth my time". It just makes our conversations more interesting.
What could be more pathetic than insisting on surrounding yourself with "+1s"?
Sometimes, politics seems to be shorthand for morality, but I agree that Ultralight's friend was almost comically out of line.
I wonder if UL's friend thought he was "hiding behind free speech" because UL's friend perceives there to be an obligation to combat racism in whatever form it occurs, including someone giving a speech with racist ideas. I am thinking that because of my experience with social work students, social work faculty, and the concept of the "social justice warrior." Which is a dumb concept, in my opinion, but that's just my opinion.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)