Is puzzled - what set of facts could make you do a 180 on your conviction principle?

Is puzzled - what set of facts could make you do a 180 on your conviction principle?

Zombie, I try to live by those principles, and sometimes I fail. I am not perfect, I am simply human. Don't get me wrong, I say the person had every right to say what he said, but after similar behavior, I cannot in good conscience defend what I saw... Like I said before, I wash my hands of it.

Was it that bad?

Was it that bad?

Jordan, so many responded quite vehemently against it. I tried a different approach in my response and the above is the result. Look, Jordan I respect your right to say what you will, but can I in good conscience defend what was said... I don't think I can.

I don't hate or dislike you, I am doing my best to see this rationally... but it is hard. Jordan, we all must be responsible for our actions, that includes you.

Take care.

@ Drew

It was horrible. Particularly considering a short time before I had said I found it particularly offensive when the same thing was posted in chat.

I'm with you, you have the right to say what you want, but in polite company, offending someone for the heck of it is senseless!

You have a right to say whatever you damn well please. I have a right to call you an idiot and create backlash for what you said.  

What that twit said, he had every right to. But everyone else also had the right to pile on him because what he said was horrendous. 

I agree whole-heartedly with everything you wrote here. 

Well I missed it. Clearly it was in extremely bad taste but all folks have to do us walk away. In fact, unless it's illegal - which I doubt this was - that's what we should do, not revoke belief in FOS. Otherwise we're heading towards big trouble. Drew seems to have conflated defending the right with defending the content. It's perfectly possible to uphold the former and despise the latter. No need for any compromise or soul searching

Well I missed it. Clearly it was in extremely bad taste but all folks have to do us walk away. In fact, unless it's illegal - which I doubt this was - that's what we should do, not revoke belief in FOS. Otherwise we're heading towards big trouble. Drew seems to have conflated defending the right with defending the content. It's perfectly possible to uphold the former and despise the latter. No need for any compromise or soul searching

Yeah... it was a weird night for me. I can and often do overreact. Thanks Zombie

Well I missed it. Clearly it was in extremely bad taste but all folks have to do us walk away. In fact, unless it's illegal - which I doubt this was - that's what we should do, not revoke belief in FOS. Otherwise we're heading towards big trouble. Drew seems to have conflated defending the right with defending the content. It's perfectly possible to uphold the former and despise the latter. No need for any compromise or soul searching

I read the post (and another one) that has prompted a lot of this reaction and I do agree, what was said was very offensive, especially when it was said seemingly for no purpose BUT to cause a reaction.  

Don't give up on your convictions though Drew.  Freedom of speech is important and we should not give up on it because of a few people who may abuse it. 

In situations like this I am reminded of the Monty Python character, the French Taunter.  His line "Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!" kind of applies to blog posts.  The blogs and posts here are just as powerful as we let them be. It was offensive to read, but I chose to read it, knowing that this member's posts have become progressively more offensive.  I could have at the time, and will probably in the future, just not read this person's posts. He can't offend me if I'm not there to read it.

I missed it too, because I walked away a while back already. Although I agree with Zombie, I admire your reaction, Drew. History shows walking away is not always the best course of action.

Drew, defending a person's right to speak freely is not the same as defending what they say. You in turn have every right to tell them you believe they are wrong. This is free and equal discourse. I stopped reading those posts because I feel the person speaks only to offend. I am free to say I believe this behavior displays a certain immaturity and lack of character. It is self-centered and attention seeking. You have voiced your scorn, now don't read his future posts. Simply ignore them, by doing so you rob him of what he most desires and doing so causes you no harm. You will stand in good company.

I am sorry that you were hurt by someone's callous actions but think you have come out the better for it.

Regards,

dughlas

Alright, I want to put this entry and its subject to rest, so tomorrow morning at 8 AM (CST) I will lock this entry. Here are my final thoughts:

Did I do a complete 180 on Freedom of Speech? No, my resolve with the two principles I outlined were really put to the test. I am never going to say a person doesn't have a right to speak freely. But, I will take all of your advice and defend his or her right, and not the content.

On humor, there are so many professional comedians, satirists, and humorists that say, write, and do offensive things for the sake of their craft. Even, then, many cause controversy. A good example is that of Bill Maher, he has people who absolutely enjoy his brand of humor, and he also has others who find it deeply offensive.

Now, if a person wants to make fun of American Culture, politics, et cetera, that is fine by me. I think most everyone would be fine with humor at the expense of something related to America. But, this applies to humor in general, there must be a clear theme. It must have a purpose beyond the superficial "shock-value"  Even then, this will not guarantee that a person will be offended.

It is taste, tact, and common sense that can go a long way.

So, guys I want to put this entry and its associations behind me and start with a refreshed mind. and to all.