Squall7
A li'l bit different
It's debatable, but sometimes when you have all the info, you will automatically be enlightened, unless you choose to disregard things because it doesn't fit in with your views, in which case, one has to question whether he should be in a position to say that in front of cameras at all.blueovalboy7 said:Good points, I'm just saying what about those who are educated with the "full-blown" details and still does not feel they should accept it?
Well, I don't think its as black and white as that. Some Christians believe that it's ok. Some homophobes are aetheist. When people put their own beliefs over the freedom of others, perhaps they shouldn't be on TV or in the media anyway.I think we should show them where and why their beliefs are flawed, but if they still choose to keep their ideals what then? I agree if we have problems with people of a certain "group" there should at least be some attempt made at talking with them and at least trying to resolve the differences, but it doesn't always work out.
I agree but then surely the idea of "civility" is one from a priviledged background anyway. What if the response was not civilised, would Jerry be justified? Regardless, with homophobia happening regardless of the actions of homosexuals, it still doesn't equal out.By no means is being ignorant a way out of punishment, if anything it requires some sort of "backlash" as you said. Also I agree that the offended should have the right to say whatever it is they wish to say to their offender, but we generally hope that the offended will be the "more civilized" of the two parties, and from what I've noticed they usually are. Which in turn puts more negative spotlight on the offender which is not a bad thing at all; some how they need to be shown they are in the wrong, but whose call is it for what punishment to be administered.
I can't quote the last paragraph in your post because I'm on the Wii, and it won't have anymore space.