Jefferson, you make me giggle.
You're right, I wouldn't be offended, and neither should you be offended by my
I ought to clarify myself. It doesn't offend me that you try to save lives; it offends me that you have no regard for the opinions or well-being (whether it is mental or emotional) of others. You have no qualms about provoking hostility in your fellow man, and quite frankly, this bothers me.
Furthermore, you assume I
want to knock you over. I don't wish to do physical harm to you; if possible, I would try to GO AROUND YOU. If that wasn't possible despite my efforts, this means I would have knocked you over by
accident. Therefore, willingness is not present, as it is superceded by my willingness to save the child.
I have in no way shape or form expressed a desire to do any type of harm to anyone in this thread (save my joke about running over the protestors...), whereas you nonchalantly DESIRE to do mental and emotional harm to others if it means you are being righteous in your own mind. We still are different, and I'd like you to reevaluate who is being the selfish one here. I'm not the one forcing my values onto others with the close minded belief that they are the absolute truth; I am the one who allows others to pursue their own well-being in their OWN WAY. J.S. Mill even dictates that people ought to seek knowledge so that they may seek their "own good in their own way." You disallow this choice, and thus contradict yourself.
Jefferson, I am not going to argue that making one's opinion known is ineffective; I understand that this is fundamental to the marketplace of ideas. However, your conduct within this marketplace is questionable. You cannot force people to "buy" your ideas via coercion or fear or some other form of harm; you must promote logic in such an arena. Truthfully my good man, you are the one who ought to "grow up." Stop childishly living by the phrase "I'm right, you're wrong, change your ideals now." You fail to acknowledge that you could very well interact logically with a more receptive audience, avoid confrontation, AND potentially save lives.
Yes, the difference in degrees of selfishness between us is becoming apparent.
A delightfully Jefferson-istic "nuh-uh." I applaud you. The fact that you must prove that you are "selfless" for your own personal satisfaction and gratification detracts from your credibility on the entire thread. Furthermore, you ought to be protesting in the interest of others, and not your own closed-minded ideal, which you clearly are not doing.
I applaud you for not holding my lack of prudence against me; as stated, I would not TRY to knock you over. Not only am I a scrawny, 5'8 18 year old, but I'm not physically confrontational. I can't stress enough that in any situation, I prefer to evaluate the circumstances and exercise reason to come to the best decision. If I can avoid hitting you AND save the child, then I will most certainly get at. This is the lack of reason that the protestors exhibit; they prefer to provoke hostility in promoting an allegedly moral end as opposed to taking the more beneficial road of a less confrontational dialogue. I would really implore any and all protestors to try this; I'll come debate with you in this instance, and I might even fight on your side. This is really my goal throughout my sarcasm and wry attempts at humor; give people credit. Convince them logically as to why you are right. If your standpoint is logically sound, you ought to have nothing to fear. I understand that some will be too stubborn or silly to listen when approached civilly; but you cannot be certain of the response until it is tested. I have had my own viewpoints changed, and have changed the viewpoints of my friends, through very friendly debate and dialogue. How funny... I'm protesting to change, well... protesting.
