Does Diasgreeing with People Morally Make it Right to Dehumanize?

[Sha'irullah]

I do not think it is right to oppress or harm anybody, that is what wives are for

 

[Buddha Dharma]

You said first that just because someone disagrees with the lgbt they shouldn't do violence etc.

Right, then you made it a left versus right issue, so I shifted it into that context. Right-wingers often claim compassion for LGBT people, but do much to make their lives infinitely worse.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

You obviously just don't want to acknowledge the fact that the political left does the same thing.

There you go making it about 'the left' again

 

[osgart]

I find the truth of life to be extremely simple. And yet here we sit in a world where dehumanizing treatment goes on.

Whether you agree with it or not, they are still people.

What I find bad also is people debasing themselves.

I know a guy currently reading ' how to be a bad @*^' , and 'the art of not giving a f*^&'.

I only thought the guy was a sick man. Turning the lights out on his own soul.

Death is better than living that way.

 

[74x12]

Right, then you made it a left versus right issue, so I shifted it into that context. Right-wingers often claim compassion for LGBT people, but do much to make their lives infinitely worse.

And I agreed with you that violence should not be done to them. I do not consider freedom of speech to be violence however. I support freedom of speech. I don't support everything anyone says, but they have a right to say it. I'm for freedom of religion. So I can't support forcing anyone to do anything. I believe marriage should not be dictated by the government at all. It should be free; as we claim we are a free people and not slaves. Yet, we in the USA fail to realize that in many ways people are freer than we are elsewhere. People want a nanny state. I don't support it. People can't handle freedom so they give it away. They're afraid so they will be slaves.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I do not consider freedom of speech to be violence however.

Do you suppose I meant freedom of speech? Sorry, I'm simply trying to come to an understanding.

 

[osgart]

Creative? How so?

I extend mercy to the guy.

 

[74x12]

Do you suppose I meant freedom of speech? Sorry, I'm simply trying to come to an understanding.

Alright, no worries. I thought you were implying that violence can be words also. I agree that words can be hurtful. But, I do agree with people's right to say what they like regardless of that fact. Otherwise they could take my right to say what I like also. We can't fall into the trap of banning hurtful speech only because we don't like it. Any erroneous speech should be countered with solid arguments and thus made null and void through reason and logic; rather than the violence of silence.

 

[Thief]

Simple question here friends. Does it?

Because as a Buddhist this is what I would say about disagreeing with LGBT people just for example- that it doesn't mean anyone is right to mistreat them, oppress them, or do things to them they know are forms of mental torment. Isn't this the actions of a thoughtlessly cruel person?

Even the people we morally disagree with at the deepest level- I don't think it's right to dehumanize or torment anyone.

morality? or maturity?

I work with a collection of toolmakers that have a grade school mentality
it's demoralizting
makes me want to kick their asses

and there are people in the news that do things beyond human common sense
they are not human in mind or heart

and then people who nod their heads to any dogma the church deals upon them
THAT really breaks a proper sense of morals

I find it difficult to consider my fellowman ...human

call me a cynic if you must