The larger part is not disrespecting/judging/punishing the negative actions grown from such beliefs.
And I think the only way to stop the actions is to combat the beliefs.
I don't see that. Neither in respected media or extreme media.
Good for you, but seems to be willful ignorance to me.
The Politics of Impartiality: How Media Frames the Climate Change Debate - Brown Political Review
We don't have climate deniers in charge of the US government because the media treated all sides of a subject as having equal validity, we have climate deniers in charge of the US government because we didn't judge/condemn/punish the negative actions of those who believed such ideas.
Because the American people were not presented with the data in an objective manner. The evidence was manipulated by media presentation.
Discussions on the ideas? Absolutely. How else can you teach it's wrong if you don't respectfully discuss the ideas?
The actions? Absolutely not.
You are building a strawman. Please debate what I actual wrote not what you want to attack.
I said nothing about discussing the idea. I asked if the beliefs of pedophiles and white supremacists were deserving of respect. Do you think they are?
Then don't respect them. But you should, still, respect her (as long as she simply holds/discusses such believes.)
Disagree. I do not think a person that feels I am not entitled to the same rights and freedoms as they are is deserving of my respect. I have a brother that thinks I should not have the right to vote because I am not a christian. I have no respect for him. I am a firm believer that respect is earned and not freely given and I am a firm believer that words have meaning and power. Words are actions.
Espouses? What's wrong with you?
People need to be able to "espouse" whatever they want, whenever they need to.
What is wrong with you? Do not attack me. If you disagree, disagree without making it personal. You need to step down from your high moral horse. People can espouse whatever they want. Words are actions. When they espouse hate they need to be called out and ridiculed. I in no way stated people should not be able to espouse there beliefs. Just that there are consequences.
Have you never read a history book?
My training is in History, So yes. Are you voicing the meaningless pithy line of those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it? The line actually means nothing.
Until people realize the ridiculousness of preventing speech.
Again with the strawman. People are entitled to say whatever they want. That you make the claim that I think otherwise just shows a lack of understanding or a conscious effort to misrepresent what I actual argued.
Speech is action. Faith should feel free to say what she wants but she and her beliefs are not deserving of respect.
Or we could spin the wheel another time, if you prefer.
Strawman again? I thought you were better than that.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?