Monday, November 5, 2012

Disagree without being Disagreeable



In an attempt to maintain an open and fair discussion on controversial topics a friend of mine has requested I refrain from mentioning my views or opinions on his blog.  He has also taken to deleting my existing answers to his questions and then ridiculing me for failing to provide answers to his questions.  When I asked if editing, deleting, or removing my posts was akin to censorship I was informed that his actions should not be confused with censorship.  He fully supports Freedom of Speech, just not for me on his blog.

At first he asked me to refrain from commenting on religious matters.  After a couple days of thinking this over, in an attempt to be civil I agreed I could refrain, but asked if I might respond to questions aimed directly at me by name.

When I asked my friend if I had been rude or uncivil I was informed I had done nothing wrong, but my views were no longer welcome.  He also wanted me not to mention Jesus in my personal e-mails to him when he himself was discussing religious matters or expressing his opinions. I appreciate his honesty and candor even if I can’t fully agree with his actions.

I do not want to ridicule him; I do understand a blog is an extension of your self which exists in cyberspace; you shouldn’t have to allow everyone and anyone to post what ever they want.  Profanity, explicit materials, and spam advertising is routinely removed from most blogs.  Trolls and muckrakers are another problem, there is a balance between shutting up an idiot and allowing for honest discourse; it takes skill and discernment to distinguish between the two.  I always endeavor to abide by the guidelines of the owner of a blog or website; I believe in civil disagreement.  One of the best ways to strengthen your opinion or argument is to be kind and courteous.  Disagree without being overly disagreeable.

No comments:

Post a Comment