- 23 Oct 2018 20:25
#14956231
You said his comments were not relevant to social policy, but his comments described Democracy. So is your argument Democracy is not relevant? If so then you are supporting rule by minority view. This is the problem with expanding individual rights too far. This is what he is saying. There must be limits or their is no democracy.
Pants-of-dog wrote:This is so poorly written that it took me a while to figure out you were actually addressing me.
What are you trying to say?
I pointed out to @Verv that feelings are not a good reason to determine social policy. If it were, then we would outlaw portrayals of Mohammed because it would hurt the feelings of Muslims.
And in response to this point, you claim that you are being ruled by some minority?
You said his comments were not relevant to social policy, but his comments described Democracy. So is your argument Democracy is not relevant? If so then you are supporting rule by minority view. This is the problem with expanding individual rights too far. This is what he is saying. There must be limits or their is no democracy.
I dream of the United Citystates of Earth, where each Citystate has a standardized border such as one whole degree of Latitude by one whole degree of Longitude.