Try to Walk in Another Mans Shoes

[HeadExam 1,783]

It is not easy. A post came up in the off topic section of GTTalk forum about the Tennessee military killings, most expressed sadness and prayers, but along comes a moderator who declares that this is a GT talk forum and posts concerning firearms OR politics will be taken down.

 

http://gardentractortalk.com/forums/topic/46875-tennessee/

 

Okay I understand rules are rules, but why have a "Off Topic" on ANY forum if there are going to be rules about posting political or citizens/personal rights issues. I'm walking in another mans shoes by saying, that is the right of the forum to take down posts as seen fit. Still walking in another mans shoes I do not see why there would be an section for off topic if you were going to limit off topic discussions as one saw fit. I mean there is no real way to post all the off limits subjects, so why have the section in the first place. It seems on volatile subjects this only tend to invite derision in an otherwise amicable forum.

 

If you try and see the other side of the coin, whether it be gun control, gender issues, or politics, one might begin to realize how each side feels, that they are not being represented, and their issue needs to be advocated. However advocating one side of ANY situation will bring diametric opposing opinions that tend to be derisive. 

 

So my question is, Are we being tolerant to allow any vocal advocating of any issue (other than legal), or are we being selfish and intolerant to the opposing side which has a right to an opinion?

 

Because it would seem to me that by the very act of being an advocate you ask some to deny or dilute their opinions or views. Neither party likes that to happen to them, but it is exactly what happens when everyone is given or takes the bully pulpit in society, and especially on the internet.

 

What I am talking about is allowing ourselves to be drawn into, and down, the slippery slope. For the instant I advocate or asked for a right that is not able to be given by any man, then I am denying a right that has been given to and earned by every man.

[nigel 1,874]

we have to face facts alain, we all hold strong views about something, but as moderators we have to decide whats ok for the site,because this is a very friendly forum and we want to keep it that way. We have members from lots of different countrys with lots of different politics, this forum is my meditation and i for one hate politics,there are plenty of other discusion forums for puting the world to rights

[HeadExam 1,783]

we have to face facts alain, we all hold strong views about something, but as moderators we have to decide whats ok for the site,because this is a very friendly forum and we want to keep it that way. We have members from lots of different countrys with lots of different politics, this forum is my meditation and i for one hate politics,there are plenty of other discusion forums for puting the world to rights

I hope no one misunderstands my post. What you said is right and I agree. My post was just a commentary on trying to consider of another persons opinion, no matter what the topic. I never want to intentionally hurt another persons feelings, but probably have at some time, just because my beliefs are different. We should all realise that everyone's opinion and position has value, even if we do not agree or like it. My grandmother used to say, "If you can't say something nice, do not say anything at all". Well that's fine until your beliefs turn you toward advocating for social change or on a social issue. I believe that unless that issue is not one of public health or safety, advocating comes at the expense of another person position, it is truly paradoxical to say the least. That said, maybe all social commentary needs a leave of absence on the internet and from our vocal chords, unless in private company. Personally I think many topics violate standards of good manners, but not in these days.