People are allowed to support whatever political causes they wish, so long as they are willing to engage civilly and fairly with other people. This is how the modern world works, with dialogue and debate instead of censorship, cowardly avoidance and control.
I don’t believe that you’re consistent on this position.
I would be incredibly shocked if you had the same stance towards white supremacists, Nazis, or pedophiles that want to remove age of consent.
If you do, then cheers. You’re practically a unicorn (in the sense that it’s extremely rare). I don’t disagree with that position as long as it’s consistant
Well, people are also absolutely free to choose not to associate with, use services from people whose opinions they find objectionable etc. Nothing wrong with that.
They’re just expressing an opinion just like the Lemmy devs have. (note: I have not looked into what their views are exactly so I’m not saying parent poster is correct)
At the end of the day it is just an opinion even if it is in the form of a direction because the one giving it has no real influence on or ability to make the readers do it and they know it.
Directions don’t only become directions when you have power. They’re just ineffective if you don’t have it. Doesn’t mean you’re not at least trying to control people
That is not semantics whatsoever. “Don’t open that door” is a direction whether it comes from a stranger or a police officer. Why should anything else be different?
People are allowed to support whatever political causes they wish, so long as they are willing to engage civilly and fairly with other people. This is how the modern world works, with dialogue and debate instead of censorship, cowardly avoidance and control.
I don’t believe that you’re consistent on this position.
I would be incredibly shocked if you had the same stance towards white supremacists, Nazis, or pedophiles that want to remove age of consent.
If you do, then cheers. You’re practically a unicorn (in the sense that it’s extremely rare). I don’t disagree with that position as long as it’s consistant
I disagree with what you say, but will defend to death your right to say it. If you don’t hear that often, find better friends.
That’s a very naive view, and ignores the existence of legitimately harmful opinions that must be fought
Well, people are also absolutely free to choose not to associate with, use services from people whose opinions they find objectionable etc. Nothing wrong with that.
Of course they are. But once they start telling other people what to do, they are doing a different thing from that, are they not?
They’re just expressing an opinion just like the Lemmy devs have. (note: I have not looked into what their views are exactly so I’m not saying parent poster is correct)
Nobody is being forced to do what they suggest.
It wasn’t an opinion, but a direction. “I dislike lemmy.ml because it is run by communists” is an opinion. “Don’t go to lemmy.ml” isn’t.
At the end of the day it is just an opinion even if it is in the form of a direction because the one giving it has no real influence on or ability to make the readers do it and they know it.
Directions don’t only become directions when you have power. They’re just ineffective if you don’t have it. Doesn’t mean you’re not at least trying to control people
That’s really arguing about insignificant semantics just concerning the form and not the actual implications of the message.
That is not semantics whatsoever. “Don’t open that door” is a direction whether it comes from a stranger or a police officer. Why should anything else be different?