| Mnementh said: I think this is a pretty good analysis of the whole Joe Rogan situation: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/1/27/21081876/joe-rogan-bernie-sanders-henry-kissinger EDIT: I probably should state where I stand. Interestingly enough, I am mostly a consequentialist. But there are red lines for me. But they are differently than the one described in the article. I am very deeply against killing. And that actually makes war and support for war a non-excusable fault for me, so I think Kissinger and Powell are much much worse than Joe Rogan, but not only from a consequentialist view, but also from a deontologist view. But that makes my rigid rules different than what was laid out in the article. |
Few bits from the articles that make my eyes roll:
"Rogan has made his show a safe space for anti-Muslim bigotry as well. Islamophobia, like transphobia, has a history of being more tolerated in mainstream media outlets than other forms of bigotry, and the backlash against Rogan reflects frustration over that double standard as well."
So is Christianophobia but no one cares about that. Being Islamophobic, Christianophobic & religionphobic is not only reasonable, but necessary. After all, those religions have contributed heavily to the oppression of LGBT community throughout history & every where in the world. You should never be muslim-phobic, christian-phobic though, there is a big difference between the two.
Sick of the left taking the side of a religion that are composed of set of abhorrent believes just because there is a minority in the US that hold those value dearly. The left should stand for progressive values, not with a religion that goes completely against them just to please minorities. The mainstream believes among the majority of Muslims are far more dangerous than whatever Jo Ro ever said.
The author seems to have accepted the fact that Rogan is a bigot and it discusses where to go from there, which is a shame, but it's Vox so my expectations were low to begin with.
