tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1663680578112260744.post1848891744735562642..comments2024-03-13T08:18:08.922+10:30Comments on Catdownunder: "I know you think you understoodcatdownunderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08189081688973141295noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1663680578112260744.post-45177150575041463722016-08-21T12:34:05.270+09:302016-08-21T12:34:05.270+09:30That last sentence says it all. Bob C-SThat last sentence says it all. Bob C-SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1663680578112260744.post-23941752694283301972016-08-21T12:05:38.756+09:302016-08-21T12:05:38.756+09:30PS. This does not mean open slather with people ...PS. This does not mean open slather with people able to say or do anything they want or incite others to say or do unacceptable things. There's the rub, as usual - who decides where the line is drawn. That's why we have laws: to control unacceptable excesses while allowing as much freedom as possible. And that's why we need free speech, so that the laws reflect the best judgment available.<br /><br />LMcCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1663680578112260744.post-80075249698877979602016-08-21T11:57:40.900+09:302016-08-21T11:57:40.900+09:30You point out how difficult this area is.
I want ...You point out how difficult this area is.<br /><br />I want people to be able to express their ideas and opinions even if - especially if ? - they differ from mine. It's the main reason I read this wide-ranging blog and Letters to the Editor.<br /><br />I do not want people to be able to stop the exchange of ideas and to stop discussion. Especially, and this, I suspect, is their motivation, so they can claim their (unchallenged, unchallengeable) ideas are then accepted by the public. I believe that this could lead to a narrow, bigoted, unthinking population, doing what the "masters" want, even if this is not in the population's best interest.<br /><br />LMcCAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com