It doesn't effect you...

...so why are you so against it?

I've seen this argument been used time and time again by people all over... and I'm curious if any of you are as annoyed by it as I am.

Should I only care about what affects me, personally, directly, in the immediate future? Should I lose all empathy for others, because, by god, I'm not in their situation, so what am I whining about?

Is it only right to debate against something if you yourself are being attacked? Or should you stand up for other's rights just as much as you should for your own?

Because it affects other people. Most of the time (most!) I care about these people and I'd not like to see anything serious happen to them (most!).

Just out of curiousity, did you read my whole post? Or were you just stating your opinion which was uncannily similar to my own?

North King said:

Just out of curiousity, did you read my whole post? Or were you just stating your opinion which was uncannily similar to my own?

Click to expand...

To tell you the truth I read all of it accept for the last sentence. It got pretty dull there and I thought it would end up as useless babbling...

I live by the motto "help create the type of world you want to live in"

North King said:

...so why are you so against it?

I've seen this argument been used time and time again by people all over... and I'm curious if any of you are as annoyed by it as I am.

Should I only care about what affects me, personally, directly, in the immediate future? Should I lose all empathy for others, because, by god, I'm not in their situation, so what am I whining about?

Is it only right to debate against something if you yourself are being attacked? Or should you stand up for other's rights just as much as you should for your own?

Click to expand...

The people that use it will only say that unless something they care about is debated, then they'll be first to charge into the debate, fighting it the whole way.

The Yankee said:

The people that use it will only say that unless something they care about is debated, then they'll be first to charge into the debate, fighting it the whole way.

Click to expand...

True I'm going to have to watch myself from now on.

For me there are two rules conserning this:
No matter if it doesn't affect you should try to help other people.
To every help there's a limit. If you think you can do better - please help, but don't enforce it . If you can't help then step aside "don't make things worse". With certain attitudes comes responsibility.

It depends. People should act according to what gives other people recognition and dignity. Like gay marriage: Why are so many hetereosexuals against it if it has nothing to do with them? The real key here by not opposing it, it is a way of recognizing other people's ways and giving them the dignity to persue paths available to hetereosexual couples. Telling people not to worry about it if it doesn't bother them is a reflection on this stance.

When it comes to actions that take away human rights, however (as opposed to enabling them), that is when people should stand up even if they aren't being affected. Maybe next time they will be the target of such an attack. It is important that no person should be disadvantaged because of petty differences.

I Think of it as a buffer

If i stand up for people's rights then the people who want to remove my rights have to go through other's first