Quote:
|
Kevin, if a person supports morally abhorrent views and policies, it is not going "beyond criticism" to make a judgment as to their moral character.
|
Bashing the person him/herself and lying about them is not judging someone's moral position about something. Nor is merely slinging labels like "morally abhorrent".
All you have proven is that you can sling negative labels. When are you going to judge things by what they really are, instead of what you want to smear them into appearing as?
Quote:
|
But I understand why you, who yourself support morally abhorrent views and policies, are concerned about people on the left making use of their free speech rights to criticize both such views and policies and the people morally bankrupt enough to support them.
|
What do you know about morals if you engage in and condone personally insulting and grossly misrepresenting people and views of people you disagree with. I'm simply condemning the behaviour, and in response you resort to more negative labels offering no substance, basis or argument to back them up whatsoever.
At the very least when you sling a label, provide an argument and evidence to try to back it up. As a critic you should know the difference between "constructive" and nonconstrucive" "Morally abhorrent" "morally bankrupt" - these are provocative and attention-catching, just as "horrible poem" "meaningless drivel" would be in the poetry section. there is a big difference between saying something and constructively making a case. Anyone can sling labels like "morally abhorent" or "morally bankrupt" at your thoughts too. What's new? It just keeps going around and preventing people from being able to disagree about things in a civilized, constructive way.
.