No. (Off-Topic)

by Quirel, Saturday, May 03, 2014, 17:50 (3647 days ago) @ Grizzlei

It's basically not, actually, unless you believe raising concern is improper and detrimental unless it adheres to a particular set of circumstances which others have deemed appropriate.

If civility and restraint can prevent friendly fire, lynch mobs, and censorship committees, then yes. It's long overdue.

I shouldn't have to fight for respect and equal treatment against people who face little to no challenge in their lives. We raise concerns with whatever tools and methods we can.

And some tools and methods aren't worth using because they damage you more than your opponents.
Come on. Surely there's been some demonstration you've seen by someone on your side, who you wish had stayed home that day.

Why should we care about what they think if they expect us to "bring them around the second time" to ensure their support in movements for equality and respect? Support like that is of little value when it is so easily swayed.

Because that 'easily swayed' support is what made the civil rights movement so successful in the first place.

Having a respectful debate is more than often pointless no matter how civil your opponent acts in spite of their intolerance. Their arguments are based in baseless lies and accusations, and in ages old bigotry and ignorance.

It's a basic principle of debating that you're not trying to convince your opponent, you're trying to convince your audience. Civility gets you further than pure outrage.

Nobody should have to fight for their favor in an attempt to sway deeply embedded feelings that have long since done their damage. That's up to them and them alone if they want to change. Not us.

But you're still fighting, because those deeply embedded feelings are worth swaying.