@Aguirre "Are you honestly telling me that you believe that their are only two tribes: the red pill and woke groups?"
They're the only two of significance, at least as of this writing
"What about Democrats and Republicans?"
Note the colors associated with both of those cliques: Blue and Red, respectively
"You seem to have suggest some libertarian sentiments"
Small l classic liberalism, Anarchist-Lite... One can put a few different labels on my beliefs and worldview
"It doesn't stop there; there are numerous groups vying for control - how do you not see that?"
As said earlier, The Woke/Wokeish and The Red Pill/Red Pill adjacent are currently the only two of any significance
"Yet you have no problem with Muslims and their dogmatic beliefs?"
I'm not a fan of organized religion, be it a "traditional" sect or one of the ersatz theologies(Intersectionality, Red Pill Theory, Environmentalism, etc etc)that's filling the void left by the (likely interminable)decline of church service throughout The Post-Industrial West
The Constitution and the philosophy which underpins it grants us all freedom of belief though, thus so long as no one is trying to either convert me at gun/knifepoint, or/and revise the law to cater to their own religion while diminishing the liberty of all those who don't share it, I have no beef with anyone. IF an individual or gaggle of several individuals attempt to do such a thing, I'll have a quarrel with THEM personally, not every last adherent of any theology
"Are you not aware that Islam is political in nature, not simply just a religion?"
I'm aware that many(especially many of those who practice one of the three Abrahamic faiths) are more fond of melding their politics and their religion together than The Feds are of gunning down citizens in broad day light, then trying to whitewash such savagery as "self-defense" afterwards. Thus we have The Moral Majority and AIPAC, along with perhaps a dozen among the 2% who identify as Muslim who want to the legal system to cater to THEIR beliefs exclusively. I have a problem with folks who behave that way on an INDIVIDUAL level, not with any religion itself
"You don't think they (or any group) would vie for political control and take full advantage of the weak and naive 'do whatever you want as long as you're not hurting anyone' crowd?"
Those who view individual liberty as "weak and naive" are inevitably the sort of folk who support increased authoritarianism, under the guise of "protecting society from the bad people"
"I am assuming you believe transgenders can choose their bathrooms then"
They've been doing so for at least a century now, when sex changes first became surgically achievable... Prior to the early to mid 10s, barely anyone was pretending this a "problem"
"So if a grown man claims to female, you are ok with him following your daughter into the girls' washroom?"
Nothing has ever really stood in the way of ANYONE walking to ANY washroom, if they're determined to do so. Dunno that the chances of physical assault are inherently greater in such locations than they are anywhere else. A woman walking down the street after dark, while a man is also walking down that same street, isn't an uncommon occurrence... Such a situation only becomes hazardous, IF the fellow is inclined towards criminality. As is so often the case, there's no problem, UNLESS someone goes out of their way to create one
"Why not just have unisex washrooms for all to use then?"
We may be heading in that direction... Recall the showers in Starship Troopers. Somehow, I suspect that such things coming to pass WOULD NOT bring about a cataclysm
"And if a man like Epstein had proveably consensual sex with a 'sexually mature' 14 year old, would you have a problem with it?"
I would say that such things occur, far more often than we choose to acknowledge, and it's not just men horning in on teen girls... There's no shortage of RL Mrs. Robinson's out there. And that morally objectionable as these events may be, we haven't done ourselves any favors, by continuing to pretend that they're in the same league as someone being dragged into a dark alley, then violently ravaged
The world is filled with people of both genders who, at some point in their teens, had a fling with someone several years their junior and WERE NOT "traumatized" afterwards... This is yet another area of life where we've tried to criminalize our way out of what's really a complex social phenomena
"Or would you prefer the law to intervene and prevent him for exercising his individual liberty?"
Again, the law DOES NOT ultimately prevent anyone from doing anything. We wouldn't have to lock our doors at night, if simply outlawing murder and burglary hindered those who are predisposed towards committing such acts
"If you had a son attending school who needed to stay alert in class and during study, would you be ok with a drug dealer giving him street drugs if he willingly wanted them and paid for them, risking that he could possibly become a future addict?"
Kids have been selling each other dope in junior high and HS since the beginning of drug prohibition... Forbidding the practice has been thoroughly ineffective at preventing it. And most DO NOT become hard-core addicts afterwards. We can disapprove of such acts in the abstract, and still acknowledge that they come nowhere close to being an existential threat to the foundations of civilization as we know it
"Don't tell me you'd want to intervene..."
I have no desire to "intervene" in the typical tween/teen jackasery that we ALL partook in at that age, this is true
"This is a very scary picture you are painting. It is utterly naive to suggest things are anywhere near as simple as you proclaim"
Well, I find the renewed enthusiasm for a more intrusive Big Brother that's rampant in many corners of our society pretty f-c-ing terrifying. Clearly, we didn't learn much as a society, from the years immediately after 9/11
