Political Correctness

Julio3000 said:
I never see leftists getting hired by this kind of outlet.

I agree with you that there is a too-narrow band of discourse deemed appropriate by the gatekeepers here.

He got fired because the Atlantic decided that his upside was not worth defending his repeated take that women who've had abortions should be hanged. You've assiduously declined to address what he actually wrote, which I think is an important component here.

I mean, if ideological diversity is what you're after here, why aren't you similarly het up that center-right publications don't hire socialists to write for them?
Click to expand...

I'm less concerned about outlets hiring diverse opinions as I am conservative opinions consistently being silenced.

But by all means, I'd welcome socialst viewpoints on conservative media. Their everywhere else so might as well bring it on. Problem is leftist opinions can't handle differing views so the Twitter mob would demand they apologize for joining a conservative outlet... So why bother?

Meanwhile, Williamsons opinion is not outrageous if you see abortion as literally murdering a baby. And that is certainly not an outrageous opinion as there is plenty of science to support it
 
So you think that advocating for executing women who've had abortions is quite reasonable and should be part of the discourse?
 
It was a Twitter conversation, which you've waived away numerous times when your mob celebrates the death of an old republican lady...

Among the most controversial was an exchange on Twitter about abortion and the death penalty. Williamson declared that “the law should treat abortion like any other homicide.” Pushed to clarify, Williamson added, “I have hanging more in mind.” Later, he expounded, “I’m torn on capital punishment generally; but treating abortion as homicide means what it means.”
Click to expand...

And if you believe abortion is murder, which is not an outrageous opinion and I hold the same belief, then we should be free to discuss what that actually means.

But no... You better think twice if you don't submit to leftist groupthink or else you're out of here.

And I'll bet ya I can find 10 examples for every one you could find the other way around... If there even is one the other way around
 
sturg33 said:
It was a Twitter conversation, which you've waived away numerous times when your mob celebrates the death of an old republican lady...



And if you believe abortion is murder, which is not an outrageous opinion and I hold the same belief, then we should be free to discuss what that actually means.

But no... You better think twice if you don't submit to leftist groupthink or else you're out of here.

And I'll bet ya I can find 10 examples for every one you could find the other way around... If there even is one the other way around
Click to expand...

Well, followed up quite explicitly on a podcast.

He has every opportunity, on the MANY media platforms available to him, to explain or clarify that position. But he chooses instead to play the victim card, instead of admitting that he is not being censored, but instead tried and found wanting.
 
sturg33 said:
It was a Twitter conversation, which you've waived away numerous times when your mob celebrates the death of an old republican lady.
Click to expand...

I've done what?

But wait, which of the Twitter luminaries have "celebrated" that death have sinecures at the Atlantic or the NYT?

But, as a sideline, if you think abortion is murder, do you think women who've had abortions should be criminally charged?
 
sturg33 said:
As I said, you must agree or lose your job.
Click to expand...

And as I said, is someone who espouses a position so at odds with the editorial mission of the publication OWED a job with that publication? If so, let's get some threads going about why the National Review doesn't hire Marxists.
 
Julio3000 said:
And as I said, is someone who espouses a position so at odds with the editorial mission of the publication OWED a job with that publication? If so, let's get some threads going about why the National Review doesn't hire Marxists.
Click to expand...

But Goldberg was aware of the comment when he hired him. It was the Twitter mob that got him fired
 
Julio3000 said:
I've done what?

But wait, which of the Twitter luminaries have "celebrated" that death have sinecures at the Atlantic or the NYT?

But, as a sideline, if you think abortion is murder, do you think women who've had abortions should be criminally charged?
Click to expand...

No because they aren't currently breaking a law.

The law needs to change.
 
Julio3000 said:
Whats wrong with a free exchange of ideas that results in one idea being soundly rejected by the public?
Click to expand...

Because Twitter is not a representative sample of the public. The public is pretty split on abortion, and heaven forbid the conservative viewpoint be given a voice

Twitter is a LOUD MINORITY. Companies have every right to bend over for it, but that doesn't mean I think they should (probably the 10,000th time I've explained this). The vocal minority has proven to be violent so I suppose I don't blame businesses for cowering. But I don't think that's healthy. It's not productive for dissenting views to think twice before expressing them.

You apparently are fine with this. Sad, but whatever.
 
sturg33 said:
Because Twitter is not a representative sample of the public. The public is pretty split on abortion, and heaven forbid the conservative viewpoint be given a voice

Twitter is a LOUD MINORITY. Companies have every right to bend over for it, but that doesn't mean I think they should (probably the 10,000th time I've explained this). The vocal minority has proven to be violent so I suppose I don't blame businesses for cowering. But I don't think that's healthy. It's not productive for dissenting views to think twice before expressing them.

You apparently are fine with this. Sad, but whatever.
Click to expand...

So the public is split 50/50 on hanging women who've had abortions?
 
sturg33 said:
Because Twitter is not a representative sample of the public. The public is pretty split on abortion, and heaven forbid the conservative viewpoint be given a voice

Twitter is a LOUD MINORITY. Companies have every right to bend over for it, but that doesn't mean I think they should (probably the 10,000th time I've explained this). The vocal minority has proven to be violent so I suppose I don't blame businesses for cowering. But I don't think that's healthy. It's not productive for dissenting views to think twice before expressing them.

You apparently are fine with this. Sad, but whatever.
Click to expand...

Who's advocating violence here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top