On what issues are you unwavering?

[MonkeyFire]

Could you elaborate?

Hope musnt go out.

 

[Axe Elf]

I suppose the idea is that society accepts one view and you are left disagreeing. If this was a relatively mundane issue most would still accept it. However, certain issues I would assume are totally unacceptable for others. While I imagine there are plenty our there that would not really fight for, or against, anything, i am surprised to hear that you are one.

As Jefferson Airplane sang, "War's good business so give your sons, but I'd rather have my country die for me."

 

[Ellen Brown]

Are there any issues on which you could not accept an alternative view?

I do not mean those issues with which you disagree or do not like the outcome. I mean issues which you steadfastly believe are wrong and immoral.

What are those beliefs?

So, you've been asking the questions. How would you answer your questions? I get a lot of my direction from the Bible, especially the words of Jesus Christ himself.

 

[Woberts]

I was recently looking at a YouTube Video where the speaker asserted that slavery was not the actual cause of the Civil War. It is likely that I will not have answers for all your questions.

Well, it wasn't. It was about State's rights. The right of the States to have slaves, more specifically.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

My unwavering support of science to interpret and understand the nature of our physical existence. The knowledge is, of course subject to change over time as new discoveries and knowledge is revealed.

That, of course, and...

Personal liberty for each human to live as they see fit, within the context of each human granting that same right to others (that is, if I would not grant you that right, then it seems I should forfeit my own). That is the essential core of Humanism, to me.

Tricky question. Maybe I am unusual in this sense, but it takes a modicum of sympathy for me to acknowledge a stance as worth of being called wrong. I tend to forget all about the issues that I truly disapprove of.

Still, there are easily several. Out of the top of my mind:


Trickle down economics.

Divine right claims, including theocratic systems.

Nationalism in any way, shape or form.

Blood relationship privilege.

Opposition to same sex marriage (or to LGBTQ+ rights generally).

These....

One item that drew my interest along the OP’s line of thought is from the Christian 10 commandments.
Of the ten, nine IMO can be forgiven under certain circumstances. Only “Thou shall not commit adultery” has no sensical reason for being committed. If you have the hots for someone other than your spouse, and you cannot control your own feral urges, then get a divorce and go about your merry business. There is no moral reason you should betray the one committed to you for life, just to get your rocks off.

....and if you’re wondering. No. I have neither cheated nor been cheated upon (to the best of my knowledge ).

Curious that you should ask that. Upon some reflection, there are certain moral issues that seem to be implanted in me by my culture, though America has a poor record on discrimination and slavery. And, it was actually Africans who captured Africans and sold them to slavers. I don't know the history well, but apparently Europe stopped slavery and then England did some 65 (?) years before America did. I was recently looking at a YouTube Video where the speaker asserted that slavery was not the actual cause of the Civil War. It is likely that I will not have answers for all your questions.

Be careful of your sources. The idea that it was about economic freedom, etc....is a common slavery/bigotry apologist tact, which blatantly flies in the face of the south’s own initial proclamation when they tried to secede, as well as many political discussions and statements recorded from that time period. Freedom and/or economy were an afterthought.
Yes, as @Woberts says above. Freedom or “right” to hold other human beings as chattle was the crux of the attempted treason/secession. Pathetic double talk.

 

[shunyadragon]

Well, it wasn't. It was about State's rights. The right of the States to have slaves, more specifically.

Yes, all the leaders that formed the CSA stated not only states rights, but in particular the right to own slaves.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

Could I accept alternative views? Obviously yes, if they were backed by evidence and reason. On what am I unwavering? On the need for evidence and reason.