> One case is troubling, yes, but hardly proof of a broad existential threat.
I think the issue for many, is that we’ve seen a lot of instances of “one case” over the past decade, become more and more normalized in many facets of our society.
I distinctly remember back in the day people would be berated for the “fallacy” of the slippery slope, only to be proven right a decade later.
It’s caused a lot of anxiety, and while people were vocal about it in the past, they’ve come to feel like a firmer “foot down” attitude is required.
And I say this as a dude who is 100% religious, and firmly in the camp of free expression and religious freedom going hand in hand, to the point I disagree with a lot of Quebec’s secularism legislation (including this bit). But I think it’s worth examining why these attitudes exist, even if they aren’t my own personal beliefs.
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
1 Kommentar
> One case is troubling, yes, but hardly proof of a broad existential threat.
I think the issue for many, is that we’ve seen a lot of instances of “one case” over the past decade, become more and more normalized in many facets of our society.
I distinctly remember back in the day people would be berated for the “fallacy” of the slippery slope, only to be proven right a decade later.
It’s caused a lot of anxiety, and while people were vocal about it in the past, they’ve come to feel like a firmer “foot down” attitude is required.
And I say this as a dude who is 100% religious, and firmly in the camp of free expression and religious freedom going hand in hand, to the point I disagree with a lot of Quebec’s secularism legislation (including this bit). But I think it’s worth examining why these attitudes exist, even if they aren’t my own personal beliefs.