CANCEL CULTURE?
Last week, ETOT was reported for ‘hate speech’. That was disheartening and disappointing :( Is a presentation of alternative perspectives ‘hate’? Why are we being accused of ‘hate speech’?
This is not the first time ETOT has been accused of ‘hate speech’. Vimeo shut down our account for “hateful and discriminatory speech”. One of our videos on YouTube was initially removed for violating “hate speech policy” but later reinstated after our appeal. Fortunately, our IG account is still ‘alive’ (for now).
Can we no longer have civil discussions on social media? Does disagreement with LGBTQ ideology warrant labels like ‘homophobic’, ‘transphobic’, ‘bigoted’, ‘hate-filled’, ‘far-right extremists’, etc? Why does it feel like there is an increasingly implicit silencing of alternative viewpoints? Why are people (incl LGBTQ people) who disagree with LGBTQ ideology labelled 'bigots'? Is there room in society for healthy and respectful disagreement with LGBTQ ideology without name-calling and labels?
Last week, ETOT was reported for ‘hate speech’. That was disheartening and disappointing :( Is a presentation of alternative perspectives ‘hate’? Why are we being accused of ‘hate speech’?
This is not the first time ETOT has been accused of ‘hate speech’. Vimeo shut down our account for “hateful and discriminatory speech”. One of our videos on YouTube was initially removed for violating “hate speech policy” but later reinstated after our appeal. Fortunately, our IG account is still ‘alive’ (for now).
Can we no longer have civil discussions on social media? Does disagreement with LGBTQ ideology warrant labels like ‘homophobic’, ‘transphobic’, ‘bigoted’, ‘hate-filled’, ‘far-right extremists’, etc? Why does it feel like there is an increasingly implicit silencing of alternative viewpoints? Why are people (incl LGBTQ people) who disagree with LGBTQ ideology labelled 'bigots'? Is there room in society for healthy and respectful disagreement with LGBTQ ideology without name-calling and labels?
Food For Thought
Here are questions on the 377A Parliamentary debate (thus far) for us all to think about.
Here are questions on the 377A Parliamentary debate (thus far) for us all to think about.
“MARRIAGE EQUALITY”
Ever thought of why the “traditional” definition of marriage is a “tradition”? Is this a good or bad tradition? Ever thought of the impact of “redefining marriage” on society?
Is it beneficial for society to break down the definition of marriage from “a union of a man and a woman” in exchange for “union(s) of limitless possibilities”? Should there be a limit? And if yes, why and what should this limit be?
Would the deconstruction of marriage render marriage meaningless as marriage becomes ‘undefinable’? Would this bring about greater societal stability and flourishing or the opposite?
Ever thought of why the “traditional” definition of marriage is a “tradition”? Is this a good or bad tradition? Ever thought of the impact of “redefining marriage” on society?
Is it beneficial for society to break down the definition of marriage from “a union of a man and a woman” in exchange for “union(s) of limitless possibilities”? Should there be a limit? And if yes, why and what should this limit be?
Would the deconstruction of marriage render marriage meaningless as marriage becomes ‘undefinable’? Would this bring about greater societal stability and flourishing or the opposite?
The owner of this channel has been inactive for the last 11 months. If they remain inactive for the next 17 days, they may lose their account and admin rights in this channel. The contents of the channel will remain accessible for all users.