[cik]

The lack of nuance on this issue, in society is shocking. We expect people to change and grow over time. People change opinions, political parties, perhaps even ideals, yet we crucify people in the public domain for opinions they once opined, and possibly still hold.

At best this discourages dialogue. It discourages people from interacting in the public domain, vilifies their non-work lives, and unifies them in terrifying ways. Actions have consequences, and (from outside North America) it appears that the goal is to polarize society and then prosecute in the court of public opinion.

[emerged]

I’ve noticed society also tends to be surprisingly supportive of people who were once drug addicts, even in spite of any crimes they committed during that time. It’s recognized the effort it takes to change and sometimes evens seems to be perceived as making you a better or more impressive person than someone who never took drugs in the first place.

Maybe these things have to become so prolific that it touches a critical mass of society until we learn how to properly conceptualize people with a past and provide for a path of redemption.

[cik]

Does the question not become redemption from what? There are individuals who support X or support Y - but in the modern era to some group of people support for either of those letters is abhorrent.

Today people are 'cancelled' for holding certain political views. Perhaps in the future they're cancelled for having eaten meat, or spending money in a communist country. What about holding stock in Nestle, or perhaps at one point in time supporting a (now disgraced) cleric. The nuance is rather important - the world is neither black, nor white.