Originally Posted by
LittleFuzzy
Fair enough. Ok, let's go by how he treats people on here. He's opinionated, but he's even-tempered. He takes a lot of flak but doesn't dish any out. As a personal matter he has a religious-based objection to homosexuality but doesn't bring it up unless someone else does, supports same-sex unions, and thinks Don't Ask Don't Tell is moronic. He doesn't think someone smoking dope is an issue that concerns him. He strongly supports self and home-defense, even to the point of lethality, and when broadly castigated for this evinced a strong tendency to demonstrate that belief in increasingly tasteless circumstances. His politics are highly partisan, expressing in abstract an ideology of government minimalism which he did not always follow through on solidly when it came to real politics.
Where does any of this look like the bullying Nessus has alleged? For that matter, please tell me where in his posting history that he taken any opinions we consider bigoted and spoken of making them policy, of trying to force the rest of society to share his views?
Do I think Lewk is really happy that someone was strangled over a tube of toothpaste? No, I don't. Nor do I think he was horrified. I doubt many of us were really horrified by that story, whatever intellectual gloss we assumed for our visible reactions. It was presented to us in a relatively neutral account, leached of most emotional content by the textual journalistic medium. Lewk probably did feel good about several accounts of lethal home defense though. He's publicly judged for that, frequently, by people on here, who find his opinions distasteful, but he mostly doesn't take the time to publicly judge others for what he feels to be distasteful.
So who is being intolerant, really? Who is actually treating people badly, in the only sphere we can see, which you allege tells us how people behave in all spheres of life? By your standard*, Lewk is a saint among monsters. He's a bigot who doesn't actually treat people in accordance with his personal opinions, while most posters on here are bigots who do treat people in accordance with their intolerance.
*And I'll note that apparently, in strict discordance with the many claims of a morally relativistic world by most of Lewk's attackers, that apparently "bigotry" is binary and all-encompassing, that apparently we do live in a morally objective world and that objective standard is set by intolerance, which we all display.
Except possibly for Nessus. She might actually maintain a morally relativist albeit dystopian viewpoint. It can be hard to tell, since as far as she's concerned all the relative points are bad ones. The world is constructed tautologically where if her negative view of something is wrong, that only means things are worse than she thought.
