PH* I am not here to shame anyone, but rather wish to provide insight on one argument thrown at me.
"You can hold your own beliefs, just as we hold ours. If you believe that this specific family is evil, while we believe the true evil lies elsewhere, then what is the purpose of our discussion?"
The answer to this is simple: the discussion is pointless. If you admit that you don't want to listen, that you don't even wish to know or consider the facts presented to you, then it js indeed, without purpose.
But don't we think that this thinking is just incorrect? Shouldn't we be considerate of the facts presented to us? It's Iike asking for attorneys in a courthouse with you being a judge already banging your gavel.
What are your thoughts on this?
"You can hold your own beliefs, just as we hold ours. If you believe that this specific family is evil, while we believe the true evil lies elsewhere, then what is the purpose of our discussion?"
The answer to this is simple: the discussion is pointless. If you admit that you don't want to listen, that you don't even wish to know or consider the facts presented to you, then it js indeed, without purpose.
But don't we think that this thinking is just incorrect? Shouldn't we be considerate of the facts presented to us? It's Iike asking for attorneys in a courthouse with you being a judge already banging your gavel.
What are your thoughts on this?