Re:How Software Companies Die by Orson Scott Card (1995)
by rmc on Friday November 29, 2013 @09:58AM
(#6819586)
That's the Paradox of Tolerance. Should a society trying to be a tolerate society tolerate intolerance? I say intolerance shouldn't be tolerated.
Are you actually saying that we should have "discussion" or a "debate" about whether some people are people?
Re:How Software Companies Die by Orson Scott Card (1995)
by grammaton on Friday November 29, 2013 @12:05PM
(#6820130)
Your argument is nonsense. People can voice intolerant opinions all they like, but when they make laws that affect a specific group of people on the basis of that intolerance, they've gone a long, far step beyond just voicing an opinion. You want to be intolerant? Great, have at it. But you don't get to back your intolerant beliefs up with intolerant laws. Intolerance in this context isn't about personally disliking a group of people, it's about actively discriminating against them on a widespread basis because of that dislike, and yes, there should be zero tolerance for that sort of thing.
Re:How Software Companies Die by Orson Scott Card (1995)
by barry-cotter on Friday November 29, 2013 @08:12AM
(#6819255)
Yeah, that's a very totalitarian point of view. Believe as I do or eat bullets subhuman scum.
In a society that hopes to remain free, there must be a difference between these. There must be space for dialogue, for experimentation, for uncertainty, for personal preference, for disagreement. "Everything which is not prohibited is mandatory" is a totalitarian motto.
For example, although I find Nancy Grace repulsive, illegitimate, unacceptable, unwatchable, and generally awful, at some level I realize she has the right to produce her execrable television programs, and I don't seek to undermine that right.
Perhaps I'm quibbling over a minor point, as I certainly have no quarrel with criticism and boycotts of OSC (or of anyone really), even though I don't choose to take part myself.