Lately I see a lot of calls do have specific instances defederated for a particular subset of reasons:

  • Don’t like their content
  • Dont like their political leaning
  • Dont like their free speech approach
  • General feeling of being offended
  • I want a safe space!
  • This instance if hurting vulnerable people

I personally find each and every one of these arguments invalid. Everybody has the right to live in an echo chamber, but mandating it for everyone else is something that goes a bit too far.

Has humanity really developed into a situation where words and thoughts are more hurtful than sticks and stones?

Edit: Original context https://slrpnk.net/post/554148

Controversial topic, feel free to discuss!

  • HasturOPMEnglish
    11·
    1 year ago

    If you think that doesn’t contradict your vaccines= gene therapy point, you need to recheck the definition of gene therapy.

    You haven’t read what I wrote or you haven’t understood it. I did not say: It is gene therapy.

    I did not say: I think it’s gene therapy. I haven’t made any statement about my opinion on that matter.

    I said: Given the, simplified, explanation of how mRNA vaccines work an argument could be made to call it gene therapy.

    I did NOT say that this is my argument. I did NOT say that calling mRNA vaccines gene therapy is right (or wrong, I did NOT make ANY judgment on that matter).

    So either you’re intentionally misreading my statements or you’re not able to understand that even if I don’t agree with an opinion I might be able to follow it’s inherent logic which is what I did.

    In any case I don’t see value in further engaging on that topic with you.