#295 Ducktrapper

I was in your exact position yesterday, so I know where you’re coming from. Melanie is just expressing an opinion, her personal opinion, she’s clear in her Spectator column that it isn’t a carefully crafted piece of scholarship, and she’s getting hammered for it. She’s been helpful, vital really, in her reportings from Great Britain on the decay of what have been the nexus of western culture despite what the French think, and so you think the response has been excessive. On the comments above, I said we can give her some slack for being wrong, and then I said something I consider to be a vital point, that she isn’t hurting anyone by expressing this opinion. Someone responded, yes, actually, her anti-vaccine position is hurting someone, and that flipped me. So I had to rethink quite a bit. So, here’s my new conclusions about this debate, and debate in general.

1. If she is hurting people, this response is reasonable.
2. If we want a world where there is vigorous debate instead of say senseless killing, well, this is what that debate is going to look like. The idea of peace without human intensity is pretty silly.
3. Nothing is keeping her from signing in here and putting herself in the position that both you and I gladly took. In fact, it would be welcome.
4. Nevertheless, you and I are proof that chivalry is not dead. Oh yeah.