Jack The Cat |
31-01-2015 02:36 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaxie
(Post 7551290)
My battery is running low too! I understand what you are saying and quoting. I suppose what I ought to have said is while I accept the right to offend in free speech I am not sure I accept that it is appropriate to use it in all instances. Just because you can doesn't mean you always should.
I say all this from a stance of not personally being easily offended. I have no religion for anyone to upset me over, personal taunts are pretty pointless etc etc. I simply don't like spite for its own sake.
|
I agree in much in what you are saying, from a personal point of view. However the choice to chose not to say something myself is a personal one I can make for myself. Not a choice I can, should or will place onto others.
One of the reasons I like Katie is she choses to say something offensive, I can respect her for making that choice (Without having to agree with what she said). Throughout history examples can be shown where a society who do not actively exercise a right find themselves losing that right. It is a slippery road once you start on it.
Rights use them or lose them.
Now I accept your point about not being offended yourself, I get that But the definition of spite is.
spite
noun
1.
a desire to hurt, annoy, or offend someone.
Hurt, annoy or offend are linked and unfortunately some will take offence and or be hurt. Is that nice, no it is not. However imho a small price to pay considering the alternative.
So spite for its own sake does have a intrinsic if unfortunate value.
|