Comment by djrj477dhsnv 2 days ago
By that definition, all politics is "hate". Passing a law will always take away the rights of a group in some way or other, and politics is the debate of whether or not that's a good or bad thing.
Personally I'm 100% for letting everyone express their gender or sexual identities. But I'm not going to demonize someone for having a different opinion and making a small donation to support their political views.
Not what defines politics what do ever, politics by definition is the practice of trying to figure out ways to solve power and philosophical disagreement.
>Personally I'm 100% for letting everyone express their gender or sexual identities. But I'm not going to demonize someone for having a different opinion and making a small donation to support their political views.
You would never ever say this if it was about a person/movement that personally affects you or your way of life.
> By that definition, all politics is "hate". Passing a law will always take away the rights of a group in some way or other, and politics is the debate of whether or not that's a good or bad thing.
Most politics isn't targeted at taking away rights from people, so most politics is not hateful.
Please don't haul over a straw man like "what about murderers and pedophiles, don't they get rights?" No, no one gets rights to hurt other people.
> But I'm not going to demonize someone for having a different opinion and making a small donation to support their political views.
I'm not demonizing him, I'm refusing to do do business with him while he thinks it's ok to fund organizations and policies that hurt people and take away rights. Maybe you should too, lest someone start to take away YOUR rights, but maybe just do it because it's not right to take away anyone's rights.
Not all politics is defined by hate, so your logic is clearly incorrect unless you’re redefining that word so broadly as to render it meaningless.
In this case, there’s a simple litmus test: is it taking away rights or adding them? It’s very hard to believe your last sentence would be true if the people whose rights were being taken away included you or people you care about, and in the case of things like LGBTQ rights there really isn’t a better argument than thinking someone else shouldn’t have the same rights you have. That’s a hateful motivation no matter how much failed Christians like to claim they “love the sinner” but it’s also a relatively unusual political debate in the way that the cost or harm is entirely one-sided. Most other hot topics have at least some possibility for a principled objection based on something other than bigotry (e.g. some people oppose immigration policy changes because they’re racist but for others it’s purely economic based on downward wage pressure).