Transgender Discussion Exposes Underlying Truths

As any conservative knows, it is often very difficult to have a logical argument with a liberal.

The left is no stranger to the straw man fallacy, giving passionate rhetoric for the supposed intentions of their opposition.

But every now and again, we come upon a liberal who, despite their debatable position, is able to engage in a civil political conversation.

The Daily Wire reported:

During the Q&A after his recent speech at the University of Buffalo, Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro had a wonderful dialogue with a young liberal woman who started by asking him if his speeches and public discourse incited violence.”

While the question the woman was asking was frustrating in nature, it was done politely, and she thought about her questions before asking them.

As we know, Shapiro has not encountered the most peaceful of protestors during his speeches.

It wasn’t long ago that Antifa violently opposed Shapiro’s speech at Berkeley in California, as Mommy Underground has previously reported.

Then, for fear of harm or destruction of property, the University of Minnesota moved Shapiro’s speech way off campus to appease the liberal masses who were threatening other’s safety if they didn’t get their way, as Mommy Underground disclosed.

Thankfully, the University of Buffalo still has respect for the First Amendment, and didn’t fall victim to the left’s scare tactics.

After Shapiro’s speech, during the question and answer portion of the evening, a young woman brought up the riot in Charlottesville.

She began with the presupposition that comments by President Trump were to blame for the violence that ensued in the city that tragic day.

The young woman said, according to The Daily Wire:

“The leaders of the Charlottesville rally were empowered by the rhetoric and agenda if Donald Trump and a lot of his associates as they’ve come out, as a Vice documentary claimed. You’ve not only said controversial things, but you’ve had a couple of attacks against the trans community, transphobic attacks.. Even with that, do you feel that a lot of your speech can incite the same kind of violence?”

Shapiro first responds by asking if the speech she just heard was thought to incite violence.

The young woman admits that it did not for her personally, but continues to argue for the hypothetical bunch that may be triggered to harm others by conservative talk.

Although the young woman verbalized that she disagrees with a lot of Shapiro’s points she continues to try and have a civilized discussion about them.

This is what Shapiro praises, in that they can disagree and “have a conversation”, as the Daily Wire relays.

It was clarified by the young woman that what she means by “inciting violence”:

I just was wondering — what I mean by inciting violence is encouraging the same people who believe in like, your transphobic beliefs, even that like homophobia is a sin, based on your religious beliefs, do you believe that because of what you say you can encourage a lot of people to act on those beliefs?”

Shapiro defends his position that he has nothing to do with the violence someone else elicits by saying, “If I’m not telling somebody to commit violence, I am not inciting them to violence.”

To drive home that this position is a standard he holds, no matter what side of the political spectrum you lie, he gives an example using politicians he disagrees with:

I’ve held this standard for Barack Obama, when he was saying anti-police things, and then somebody went and shot up some police officers in Dallas; I said that’s not Barack Obama’s fault; when a Bernie Sanders supporter went and shot up a congressional baseball game, I said that’s not Bernie Sanders’ fault because Bernie Sanders wasn’t calling for that.”

It is generally believed by those of the right that you are responsible for your own actions, and that verbal discourse is never justification for a physical reaction.

Whereas the more progressive members want to blame the world for the actions of the “oppressed”, believing that they should use violence to silence those who won’t support their agenda.

As for the claim that he is transphobic, Shapiro wittingly responded that he doesn’t know that he has “ever exhibited phobia of trans people”, and that he is “not afraid of trans people.”

It is then argued by Shapiro that transphobia and homophobia is defined more by anyone who disagrees that there should be homosexual relationships or that a man should be able to be called a woman.

The young woman wants to define transphobia and homophobia as a prejudice against those people groups, but just because you don’t agree with a stance does not mean you are prejudice against them.

As The Daily Wire reports, Shapiro defends true political debate by saying:

Political debate requires that you talk to people, and people take your words as what they mean, not as an excuse to go and do violence.”

The political discussion between Shapiro and the young woman is a prime example of how opposing parties should communicate.

Violence by liberals has gotten out of hand, leaving a lot of victims, whose only crime was disagreeing, in their wake.

Having opposing views is inevitable in a world of varying experiences, but hurting those who don’t see things the same way you do is never the answer to persuade a nation.

Please let us know in the comments section if you think the talk between Shapiro and the young woman was ideal for political debate, and if you see liberals changing their approach to this style.

 

 

YOU MIGHT LIKE

Comments are closed.