This is cross-posted from Nextdoor.
subject: Is this what they mean by "dialogue"?
Eternal souls, woven into earthen vessels, sanctified by Almighty God, and endowed with the miracle of life are denied their birth by a nation born of freedom.
-- Madison Cawthorn, 2021-12-01 https://twitter.com/RepCawthorn/status/1466185847628345345
If the issue is "should women be ultimately subservient to their fetal-hosting abilities?" then no, I don't want a dialogue.
I don't think that is a legitimate topic for discussion.
It's a bit too much like "should we put kittens in a blender?": there are some questions which should be OFF [emphatic curseword] LIMITS.
This is one of them.
In response to Camille asking the purpose of the post:
The purpose is to see if there are any basic principles that we can all agree on -- such as the idea that some proposals should be simply off-limits, not acceptable within a civil society.
It often seems that the unwritten rules here -- the rules by which you and other non-progressives seem to be operating -- are based on some kind of precept of universal tolerance.
I wanted to confirm whether my understanding of that is correct.