You are not "morally" obligated to LISTEN to anyone, we are morally obligated to allow people's voice to speak. We all have Freedom of Speech whether one approves or disapproves of the ideas or debate put forth. Anyone can grab a soapbox and be heard. It is their Right to do so, but no one is obligated to listen. One has the moral Right to walk away, to offer contrary debate, but neither is morally obligated to listen to the other.
Funny how we all have a Right to speak, but no moral obligation of others to listen to contrarian views. If a contrarian view is not amplified for the individual to hear for themselves and decide the idea's relevancy, then what should that failure to amplify other ideas be called if not censorship? We must be exposed and hear...and dare say listen to other viewpoints. While not in anyway a 'moral obligation' it is an obligation of a civilized free society to allow ideas to be heard, to learn, or to reject that which is presented.
So what ? There's no such thing as a "Palestinian" or a "Palestine." It's an Arab anti-Semite/anti-Zionist.
"An audience member once asked a racist question of a black Atlantic correspondent."
What was the question ? Is he a member of the plantation party ? Why does he have a funny name ? Was he born a poor White child in Mississippi ? Does he like fried chicken ? What was this "racist" question ?
OHIO PING!!!
Article and comments
Thanks, EBH