…the way many liberals engage in discussion? Specifically, when someone on the left is offended, you’re expected to be apologetic and censor yourself. Essentially, be quiet. But when you’re offended with the left, you’re expected to get over it because they have a right free speech. Conversely, when your speech is deemed offensive, you’re intolerant and are expected to acquiesce. Essentially, be quiet. It appears that those on the left just expect those with whom they disagree on social and political matters to be quiet. Where did they get this point of privilege?
Sifting Reality 
Example? Or are you just making this up as your daily dose of left-bashing and right-worship?
Is this news to you Jason?
Oh, man, I see this constantly on my facebook feed! I have people on my friends list of all political and social backgrounds, but the ones that are strongly liberal – especially socially liberal – are truly… educational. They’ll throw something out, then are completely shocked that anyone would disagree with them or question *why* they hold the views they do. No challenges allowed! No debate! Incredibly intolerant of anyone who holds differing viewpoints, and they typically respond with personal attacks, insults, and accusations. It’s mind boggling. I’ve pointed out this double standard on more then a few occasions. That just gets them angrier, but they completely deny there is one. The cognitive dissonance such thinking requires make me seriously wonder.
I can always tell when they can’t answer my questions anymore, when I suddenly find myself unfriended.
Kunoichi AND Jason,
liberals are nearly twice as likely to block, hide, or unfriend someone on social media over conflicting political views.
https://siftingreality.com/2012/03/14/well-knock-me-over-with-a-feather/
I wonder why that is…
A family member was apalled at a story about a man who had hung an empty chair in his tree (apparently representing Obama a la the Clint Eastwood empty chair routine). I pointed out that there are nuts on both sides, and certainly plenty of examples of hateful comments made by some on the left, including more high profile people than an old man in east Austin, TX.
They said that no one they knew would do that and that they were not aware of the examples I gave. They then asked why I was so angry? Followed by “If you don’t like what you see here, stop reading”.
So, the rules are:
They may be appalled at us and express their righteous indignation.
We may not ask questions or add to the discussion or try to suggest any intellectual dishonesty on their part.
We may not be appalled at them, because they are right, and even if they’re wrong, being on the left means never having to say you’re sorry.
And, if we don’t like it, we should keep quiet.
John…
Liberals are nearly twice as likely to block, hide, or unfriend someone on social media over conflicting political views.
I wonder if this is specifically speaking more of specifically “social” type sites – facebook, twitter, etc – as opposed to serious discussion type sites (ie, more of the blogs that are designed for considering politics)?
Of all the blogs I go to, the PREDOMINANT blockers and banners and moderators (100 to 1) are the religious conservatives.
I would suppose that on SOCIAL sites like Facebook, people like going there to kick back and relax, NOT talk politics and thus, in THAT context, sure, they block partisan blowhards. It’s not the right context.
A time and a place for everything.
The real question is why do religious conservatives so consistently block, ban, moderate and avoid questions on sites dedicated to political or religious thoughts/discussions?
Maybe, dan, you could click the link and it might answer any questions you have about what “social media” means. My reference to it was to corroborate something someone else said. Despite your best efforts, we will not take this off on the tangent you would rather take it.
The hypocrisy I am talking about in the post goes beyond bloggers and social media.
“as opposed to serious discussion type sites”
In my experience, the majority of liberals are not capable of having a serious discussion about anything, never mind politics. At best, they might make it past a post or two before devolving into emotional diatribes and irrational accusations. They also excel at completely ignoring what was *actually* said, then responding with attacks for things that *weren’t* said. Sometimes, I swear, it’s as if they are in an alternate reality.
“Of all the blogs I go to, the PREDOMINANT blockers and banners and moderators (100 to 1)…”
100:1?? Just how many blogs do you visit, and how do you find time in your day to do anything else??
“… are the religious conservatives.”
I find that people who hold extreme positions that they are emotionally shackled to are the ones who are the most frequent blockers. That does include a few religious people, but when that happens, they are more likely to be politically or socially liberal than conserative (my most recent unfriending, for example, was a religious liberal). In my experience, conservative blogs are the most likely to *not* block people, no matter how trollish, because they find leaving the drivel for all the world to see proves their point so much better than anything they can say themselves. This renders your “real question” meaningless.
All I am saying that IN MY EXPERIENCE on the internet, religious conservatives are VERY loathe to engage in conversation and very much about banning/limiting dissenting voices. 100 to 1.
I don’t see how this is off tangent. I offered a reasonable explanation as to WHY some liberal types ban some conversation on social sites (inappropriate place for political debate or partisan blowhards), which is on topic. I offered my real experience (and the experience of most other liberal bloggers I know) demonstrating that at APPROPRIATE places (blogs, for instance), the real world facts are different than what is being described here. What is off topic?
And what hypocrisy is there in not wanting to have political blowhards making commentary on social sites? Of my liberal friends who have facebook who’ve talked about this, the people they have banned have been from both Right AND Left viewpoints – they weren’t banning “conservative” voices, they were dismissing POLITICAL voices in a place designed for lightweight relaxation. It’s like not wanting to engage in partisan arguments at a party or over Thanksgiving dinner – the time isn’t right.
Dan this isn’t about blocking on social media. Like I said, my mention of it was a tangent. I am talking about a broader scope. If you don’t understand the post then just hold off on commenting and wait for the next post to derail.
Sorry, I was responding to YOUR comment. I figured if YOU made a comment, it was fair game to comment on YOUR comment. My apologies.
In my experience, the Right and Left is about equally likely to have some portion of them want “the other side” to be quiet. Traditionally speaking, though, liberals have been all about protecting free speech. It’s one of their good points, even if they aren’t always consistent on it (and they’re not).
Speaking for myself, I don’t expect the Right to be quiet. By all means, offer your opinions. Just don’t try to conflate your opinions with God or suggest that the “other side” should be quiet because you are speaking for God and how dare you question God?
That is the sort of “be quiet” I hear still pretty regularly from the Religious Right.
To be sure, we all ought to protect free speech. Left or Right. Religious or not.
Well Dan, maybe next time respond to the post and not to a comment I made to someone else on a tangential topic.
Some people simply cannot bear hearing truth. There is a moral component to truth that irritates people so they try to suppress it. All truth is God’s truth. Have you ever noticed that it is ok to talk to a liberal about God unless he has some sway in how you behave? Liberals do not like a God that tells them how to vote, how to think on abortion, when sex is permissible, that man is created in a superior position to animals, etc. Truth reminds them of God, so they don’t want to hear truth.