Athena Pappas | Patriots Freedom
Mayonnaise or mustard?
No doubt you had a swift and strong reaction to that question. Some would say, “Mayonnaise!” Others would say, “Mustard!” Still others might argue, “Why not both?”
I have a personal affinity for mayo. Mustard makes me gag. And nothing you say will keep me from gagging.
Here are a few other common foods/flavors things that people debate:
- Chocolate or vanilla?
- Bittersweet or milk chocolate?
- Unsweet or sweet tea?
- Beach or mountains?
- Cats or dogs?
- Cars or trucks?
Of course, those preferences only result in what I call “friendly debates. These days people are bickering over:
- Vaccines or no vaccines?
- Masks or no masks?
- Impeachment or no impeachment?
- Police or no police?
- Open borders or closed?
- Socialism or democracy?
- Republican or Democrat?
See? Those last few raised a few more hairs on your arm and a few (depending on your passion level) might’ve even “triggered” you.
Personally, I think debate is a very good thing. Engaging one another in civil discourse is how we all grow and learn. . .which is one of the reasons I’m most concerned about what’s going on, on Big Tech right now.
My favorite pro-life group (Life Site News) was permanently banned from YouTube the other day.
They have hundreds of videos about protecting the lives of the unborn and other relevant life issues. Then, suddenly, swiftly, they were given the boot.
Surprisingly, nothing to do with the pro-life issue. They were booted because of a handful of videos questioning the current vaccine. They have shifted to Rumble and are also available on the Life Site News Catholic Rumble page, but the biggest hit came in the loss of 300,000 followers. That’s a hard number to match on alternative platforms.
I didn’t see the videos so I can’t speak to their content, but I did want to broach the subject on a wider level:
Shouldn’t we be able to have different opinions without fear of censorship?
I don’t really care if you’re an anti-vaxxer or in favor of vaccinations. That’s not the point, in my humble opinion.
Or maybe that IS the point.
I think we should be able to open discuss controversial issues, even with people who disagree with us. And every side—right or wrong—deserves a chance to state an opinion.
- Pro-vaxxers. Anti-vaxxers.
- Conspiracy theorists. Non-conspiracy theorists.
- Pro-life. Those who believe in abortion.
- Pro-Trump. Anti-Trump.
- Pro-gay marriage. Those opposed.
- Pro-masks. Anti-masks.
- Christian. Humanist.
- America first. Globalism.
- Environment. Jobs.
- Those who believe election fraud took place. Those who don’t.
These might be tough subjects, but we’ve handled equally as tough over the years. If no one had entered into civil discourse on hardball issues (like Hitler’s genocide of the Jews, for instance, or the KKK’s horrific abuse of African Americans) would we have grown and learned from the mistakes of the past?
Unfortunately, these days, Big Brother has a narrative that must be matched. So, anyone who doesn’t match is gone, just like that. Lickety-split. Poof! Gone in a puff of smoke.
These days, it looks like this:
- Non-conspiracy theorists.
- Pro-gay marriage.
- No election fraud or any mention of it. Ever.
The problem is, many of us often disagree with Big Tech’s interpretation of right and wrong because it’s always shifting. And shifting. And shifting. . .with every new wind that blows through. And yet we have no ability to debate that disagreement, which leaves us frustrated and angry that our voices aren’t being heard.
Debate is good. Civil discourse is critical. And—right or wrong—everyone deserves to be heard.
That’s just my opinion, of course. And, frankly, I’m wondering how long my opinion will be heard in the public forum.