[loveistheanswer]

>I am a fan of people being vocal about their beliefs, even if I don't necessarily agree with them. People should be held accountable, and I don't think anyone would find this to be unreasonable.

How can you be a fan of people being vocal about their beliefs, even when you disagree with them, while also being a fan of punishing people for being vocal about beliefs which you disagree with? (Assuming you're not a sadist)

[pm90]

> while also being a fan of punishing people for being vocal about beliefs which you disagree with? (Assuming you're not a sadist)

Is the difference between supporting someone's right to free speech while not being in agreement with everything they say, not clear to you?

[bpodgursky]

Nobody here is talking about legal "rights".

But he's actively endorsing a viewpoint which attempts to silence (through social coercion) dissenting views. This is at odds with his professed support for... dissenting views.

[pm90]

“People are calling out injustice rather than letting it slide” is the viewpoint he’s endorsing, which is an “attempt to silence dissenting views”? Silencing dissenting views has a very concrete meaning, which has apparently been hijacked by some people to fit their narrative of a non existent cancel culture.

[loveistheanswer]

Disagreeing and punishing are two different things.

One is fundamental to freedom of expression, the other is antithetical.

[pm90]

Choosing to not engage with people whose viewpoints you disagree with, or confronting them about what they said, is disagreement, not punishment.

[loveistheanswer]

Agreed!

Censoring/banning/deplatforming and getting someone fired from their job is punishment.