rabble wrote:The whole "understand the opposition" and "see it from their perspective" tactic is disingenuous at best because A, they are making no effort to reciprocate or compromise, B, it implies absolution for doing what they're doing, and C, implies that perhaps we should give them what they want.
Furthermore, it implies that all claims should be judged on equal footing regardless of the evidence or even the likelihood.
Then there's this conundrum: If science, as Huckleby and so many other goofballs claim, is really just another religion*, then what about the religious freedom of those who believe the scientific worldview?
Bonus question: What if I started a religion that has as a central precept the notion that multi-child families are an abomination unto the Lord, and therefore all pregnancies after the first successful childbirth must be terminated? And what if my book of scripture (dictated to me personally by God himself, as far as you know) stated that "life begins at contraction". Should our laws be rewritten to reflect such beliefs? After all, those are just "other perspectives", right?
*It's so not.