I don't think this is a place of debate?
Rather it is a place to express opinion?
However, to point out an error or other 'wrinkle' to someone might be ok?

A wise man listens to all views.
He 'digests' these, and perhaps modifies the one he holds.
But he has only one view. His own.
How he arrived at it is his business.
It is the view he expresses, and perhaps uses in public, or in his workplace.
Holding just one view doesn't mean he doesn't listen to others.
To hold a strong, well thought out view, and to act on it, is not wrong or reprehensible?
Because it perhaps differs from yours is not a bad thing in itself?

And to the last 'poster'.
I say to you in a friendly way...
Use of the words 'who' or 'which' in place of 'that' would make your post easier to read.
I can visualise the 'wroth' of my teachers had I done as you have.
Please accept my comment as positive, and without any rancour on my part.

Dear shadowminister,

You claim: "The rage against Jordan Peterson is certainly not based on any intolerance that he has ever displayed."

What rage? Hardly of the kind you lot employ against people like
Yassmin Abdel-Magied.

Peterson has always struck me as a sad person with plenty of personal issues he needs to deal with. As long as he stuck to his expertise then things were fine and he was certainly worth listening to. Once outside that he has always struggled.

"When will bigots quit bullying Margaret Court?"

The short answer - when she stops bullying and causing harm to vulnerable people. Until then, she deserves every ounce of fight back coming her way.

So Margaret won a gong for being a superb tennis player. Ho hum. Then Rod Laver got a higher award for the same thing. Ho hum again. But his was higher than Margaret's (he's a bloke after all). So now the committee who hands out these gongs have to make up for this error and upgrade Margaret's award to equal Rod's. What a schamozzle.

Just goes to even further undermine any value these awards may have had in the first place.

Hi Aries,

I suppose that nowadays, to have an opinion is potentially to insult or upset or bully somebody else, who doesn't have the same opinion.

So, as you suggest, Margaret Court may have bullied someone by her stance on gay marriage.

But is it possible that you have now upset, even bullied, Margaret Court, by your stance against hers ? That it might aggrieve her ? And an opinion alone shouldn't aggrieve anybody ?

No opinion necessarily has priority over any other. They're just opinions, not kicks in the nuts. [Oops, sorry, too much Sergio Leone].

Joe

SR,

Have you been living under a rock? The venom directed at JP is orders of magnitude greater than that directed at YAM.

YAM doesn't need security to protect her from physical violence when giving a talk, nor has protests against her taking a place at a university, people trying to block her entry into countries or trying to ban her books.

The left is far more violent than the right.

Margaret Court deserves all the awards she is given for being a big ball whacker.

Wouldn't you like to be a Big Whacker like Margaret and get a nice shiny gold medallion from the Queen of Australia.