| |
In lugnet.people, Lee Meyer wrote:
> This last argument is always appealed to when a majority having a conservative
> position is opposed to what a minority group with a more liberal viewpoint does
> or doesn't want to do.
Why cast this as conservative vs. liberal? I'm not seeing it that way and I am
not sure it's a useful characterisation.
> In this case the majority is cast as being ignorant,
> hateful and unqualified to have their viewpoint prevail because they 'just don't
> understand.'
I am not seeing any characterisation of the 'majority' as ignorant, hateful or
unqualified by anyone.
I certainly think, now that you mention it, there may be some recent voices for
which that label fits, but I think those voices bring that characterisation upon
themselves based on their own words. As I said elsewhere, I was, until recently,
rather impressed with how reasoned and well mannered this whole discussion has
been.
And what is the 'majority' you refer to here anyway? The majority of the
*posters* seem to be in accordance with the thinking I outlined above, that the
group ought to be created and the experiment tried. At this point I wonder if
most of the viewpoints haven't already been explicated sufficiently well?
That said, this is an administrative decision, not a majority one, and I believe
the details of what has been decided will be forthcoming in due course.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
207 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
