A mature person
A mature person is one who does not think only in absolutes, who is able to be objective even when deeply stirred emotionally, who has learned that there is both good and bad in all people and in all things, and who walks humbly and deals charitably with the circumstances of life, knowing that in this world no one is all knowing and therefore all
( Read more... )
"an acknowledgment that this is a situation in which I directly face the threat of violence."
This has nothing to do with the topic. It's a strawman. You dehumanizing the opposition and making hasty generalizations about them is not connected to you facing the threat of violence. Indeed, it's just one more way you dehumanize the opposition and make hasty generalizations about them. You know full well 99.9% of pro-lifers threaten no violence to you. But, by implying that anyone who disagrees with you is also threatening violence to you, you serve to dismiss them and their experiences and opinions.
"an acknowledgment that my upbringing with regard to the issue may have been different than yours. "
That's an excuse. Just as the murderer of the doctor may have been brought up to be a killer, that doesn't excuse his behavior. Are you really trying to claim your upbringing justifies bad behavior? I believe that dehumanizing the opposition is a bad thing to do - and if you were brought up to dehumanize people, you are plenty adult by now to have changed from your upbringing.
"an acknowledgment that there is an embodied component to this issue, and that purely Socratic reasoning, with its avoidance of embodied effects, may have limitations."
Another excuse. So you need not be logical if you feel emotional about an important topic in life? I am not disregarding your personal experiences which may have led you to your belief system on this topic. I consider them valuable. Instead, I am asking you to consider the personal experiences of the people who are opposed to your viewpoint on this topic. To not treat them as sub-humans looking to kill people who disagree, but to instead acknowledge that almost all of them are peaceful people who have come to their convictions on this topic through life experiences and thought of their own.
"I feel that this comment [does]" rather than "this comment [does]" or "I feel that this comment serves to" rather than "You are [____]" Because that phrasing tends to keep a conversation about an emotionally heated issue (like violence) cooler longer. It has some utility."
Fair enough. I thought it was implied that I was posting my opinions and feelings, but if it was not clear then I will try to make it more clear in the future.
"I feel that I understand your argument. You would like the conversation between pro-life and pro-choice people to remain civil and respectful. This is a very good idea. I disagree that my comment does what you assert it to have done. I don't see that you've shown me how it does that; to me it's remain an unproven assertion.
I have had no indication, at any point, that you listened to my argument, except for the specific purpose of disagreeing with me on the one hand, and on the other implying that I'm irrational. There's kind of a history of negating women in arguments where their safety is at issue, and so to that extent I find your actions either disingenuous (unlikely; you seem like a good guy) or dangerously ignorant. (Which is why I keep unfriending you.)"
Now who is being disingenuous? You locked me out of your facebook before I could even read your comment twice. I've been responding to what you wrote in personal messages, not the original comment, since then. How could I try to prove or disprove an asseration I can no longer even see, without the risk of misquoting your position? I listened to your comment initially - but since then, I have not had the opportunity to even rethink it , given your decision to lock it away. If you want me to thoughtfully reconsider what you wrote, I'll need to see it first. And, you knew that.
As for me negating women - that's just your sexism. My feminist credentials are rock solid, and I'd venture to say stronger than yours. I know you don't know me very well, but I think you running to play the "you're negating women" card is either your own ignorance, or a means of deflecting. I am treating you like I would treat anyone, regardless of their gender. You seem to see me as a male, and I see you as a person. If a man said what you had said, I would have reacted exactly the same.
Reply
Leave a comment