Topic: Do you believe that when it comes to political disputes that whatever you feel is appropriate for your side to do, the other side should be able to do as well?
For example, say there is a political disagreement on deciding to place sanctions on a country. Group A and Group B each try to rally people to their cause. We all agree that they both can freely speak on the issue. We all agree that both can protest peacefully on the issue. Is there anything in this dispute that should be off limits for one party but not off limits for the other?
Obviously this is about BLM and what tactics are appropriate to use for people upset with state and municipal employees. I've seen many people on social media and in the regular media condone violence to have their voice heard. Here's the thing, if you support the use of a tactic for *your* cause than you have to support the use of a tactic for a cause you disagree with. So those who say violence is justified for police brutality, y'all good with pro-life folks burning down minority businesses the same way BLM rioters did?