JK Rowling reveals she is survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault

[The Brain]

Tension? If someone wants to join a cult that (say) takes their entire paycheck and forbids them to masturbate then by all means do so.

The tension comes when that cult tries to disallow, say, medical treatment for the members' children and use prayer instead.  The classical liberal would say the individual right of the child overrules the rules of the cult, whereas a modern liberal might argue that the cult has a right to practice its religion as it wants, so if the parents agree with the cult's rules, the kid only gets faith healing.

Sounds like a parent thing and not a cult thing. If it's legal to only give your kid faith healing then it is, and if it isn't it isn't.

what is legal one day might not be the next.
Until 2016, discriminating against sexual orientation was illegal.  Now, it isn't really, since there are exemptions on religious grounds.

In Sweden decisions about medical procedures for kids are made by the parents. The cult cannot make that kind of decisions. As an aside, my guess is that even parents have less than total control when it comes to life-saving procedures, but I don't know the law regarding this.

[Razgovory]

I'm okay with the government stepping in and preventing people from inflicting harm on minors.

[viper37]

I think that, in the case of, say, a church that discriminates against women when it comes to seating, the church should be free to do so, and the women free to leave that church for one that has more respect for women.  Churches shouldn't have any power of compulsion, though, and they shouldn't be supported in any way by the state (other than, as in the example, the state enforcing laws against trespassing). 

You make it sound so simple.  And just like Raz, you totally ignore the concept of peer pressure.

In such cults, women are free to leave it, as long as they accept they never will see the children again, their parents, their family, their friends.  Such is the price to pay.

It isn't as simple as changing cable provider because customer service was rude to you.  You're not forbidden to see your children because you switch from Verizon to AT&T for your cellphone plan.  Your husband does not shun you for such a decision.  You aren't force to move out of your house, sometimes your town for such a decision.  Changing a Church, though?  That often happens.
And we haven't even talked about the cults that will sentence to death those who leave it.

[viper37]

I'm okay with the government stepping in and preventing people from inflicting harm on minors.

But only on minors?

[grumbler]

You make it sound so simple.  And just like Raz, you totally ignore the concept of peer pressure.

Ah, the old lazy intellectually dishonest use of hyperbole.

Does that actually work for you anywhere?

I'm gonna ignore the rest of the hyperbole because a little bit goes as far as I want to go.

[Razgovory]

I'm okay with the government stepping in and preventing people from inflicting harm on minors.

But only on minors?

Okay, you got me.  I would also support government stepping in to stop persecution of anglophones in Quebec.

[Zoupa]

I'm okay with the government stepping in and preventing people from inflicting harm on minors.

But only on minors?

Okay, you got me.  I would also support government stepping in to stop persecution of anglophones in Quebec.

You mean the most protected minority population in the world? Yeah wake me up when that happens.

[Valmy]

I have no idea what Viper and Raz are actually talking about since their conversation is entirely in the passive aggressive voice 

[Solmyr]

Freedom of speech is freedom to say anything you want without being censored in advance. It is not freedom from having to suffer consequences, including social or legal ones, of said speech.

That's a 1984 definition of freedom.  When the "consequences" of exercising freedom are prohibitive, you really do not have freedom.

When your freedom of speech starts infringing on freedoms of others, there should be consequences.

[Eddie Teach]

Examples?

[Solmyr]

So if you are censored afterwards and not in advance it is freedom of speech? What nonsense, they are both censorship with long histories of being used. They are both contrary to freedom of speech.

You are not censored afterwards. You have said what you wanted to say. If the result of that is that other people no longer want to employ you or have anything to do with you, that's their freedom.

But in any case I repeat me question, is simply thinking or speaking critically of something mean you do not tolerate it? That seems like a very hostile way to define tolerance. I may say critical things about nationalists but I tolerate their existance.

Nobody has said that. There's a difference between saying that nationalism is a shit ideology and that nationalists are subhuman and should be shot.

[Solmyr]

Examples?

Like if you say that certain people should not receive the same rights as others because of their identity. From the topic of this thread, e.g. trans women not being treated as women because they were not assigned as such at birth.

[DGuller]

You are not censored afterwards. You have said what you wanted to say. If the result of that is that other people no longer want to employ you or have anything to do with you, that's their freedom.

So it's okay for this kind of freedom to impinge on other people's freedom of speech, just not the other way around?

[chipwich]

Examples?

Like if you say that certain people should not receive the same rights as others because of their identity. From the topic of this thread, e.g. trans women not being treated as women because they were not assigned as such at birth.

Being treated as a woman isn't a right.

[PDH]

Examples?

Like if you say that certain people should not receive the same rights as others because of their identity. From the topic of this thread, e.g. trans women not being treated as women because they were not assigned as such at birth.

Being treated as a woman isn't a right.

No, too often it is more a combination of right, left, slap.