L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
You are saying that your right to be creative (free speech) trumps even the right to criticize your product (free speech). That’s elitism.
And your claims that “this requires educational and intellectual” sophistication beyond the average person's ability to comprehend is also elitist. Go back to my initial post.
The rules are simple- they’re not even rules, but suggestions- and could generally be encapsulated by The Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This simple admonition is a core teaching to all of the world’s major faiths, and as such could be articulated and understood- even if not actually adhered to- by most of the adults on the planet. Most kids, too.
(looks left)
(looks right)
...Told you, dude.
Sea. Lions.
Almost made me say it.I am he as you are he as you are me, and we are all together.
I am the walrus.
The term itself is nonsensical. It’s exactly what I stated. You cite two examples of something you think is disrespectful to the originating culture. You proceeded to expose bias
as Cinco De Mayo is a Mexican holiday last time I checked Mexican does not mean Latino.
While spirit animals exist in Non-Native American cultures you simply assumed that this is the one because of pop culture.
It’s own Incoherence is why I say it does not exist.
So, you feel like you have a right to the cultural artifacts of others, regardless how they feel about it?No I am not saying that. I have the right to be creative. They have the right to criticize. I am just saying if someone is going to be critical of something I do, I don't think it is reasonable, if I don't share their religious views, for people to expect me to be persuaded by arguments grounded in their own religious taboos. That was my only point because you had raised the issue of a ceremony not being permitted to the outside world. I was saying while it makes perfect sense for them to be able to impose that on people within their faith, it wouldn't make much sense for people outside their faith to have to adhere to it. I don't think this is that unreasonable a position.
In a free society, you kinda do. Elitism isn’t illegal.So, you feel like you have a right to the cultural artifacts of others, regardless how they feel about it?
No.
That is an incredibly unreasonable position.
You have a legal right, not necessarily a moral right.In a free society, you kinda do.
What you DON’T have is immunity from criticism for that use, from people reacting negatively to said use, from people boycotting you for that use, from possibly ruining your business over that use.
See also Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” re: capitalism for further clarification.
“Just because you can doesn't mean you should.”You have a legal right, not necessarily a moral right.