087

[attorneyatlol]

Is it really self-righteous and arrogant to be unable to look past things you can't agree with? Where do you draw the line when it comes to tolerance?

Comments

[maraich]

I think, sometimes, it's really obvious. If someone keeps doing horrible things for no reason then they probably don't care.

[attorneyatlol]

What if they were trying not to?

[maraich]

Phoenix, there's a funny thing about that. When I try not to horribly mutilate people, I somehow manage not to do it by accident.

[ridethetiger]

I don't think so. Not everything can be forgiven, and no matter the person you don't have to keep putting up with it.

[attorneyatlol]

That's how I feel about it. Or how I thought I did, anyway...

[ridethetiger]

What's got you unsure about it?

[tyki-tock.livejournal.com]

I don't think it's arrogant to have opinions, Phoenix.

As to where to draw the line, I'm probably not the one to ask.

[attorneyatlol]

Some people seem to think it is.

Probably not, but I'm interested in hearing what you have to say.

[tyki-tock.livejournal.com]

I think it's more that it's arrogant to keep an opinion even when presented with evidence that it's wrong - like thinking you know better than anyone else and refusing to listen.

I don't think you do that very often, for the record. You're usually pretty open to other ideas.

Well, I don't have too many lines compared to most people... I tend to figure everyone has the right to decide for themselves what they do. Unless it affects me personally, why should I care or try to stop them?

[truthinfortune.livejournal.com]

I think it depends on how much you value your friendship. There are some people who can argue over political issues until the cows come home, but they're still the best of friends. It's unrealistic to expect two people to see eye-to-eye on every single issue.

Of course, if such debates continue to leave a sour taste in your mouth, then it might be best to avoid speaking about such topics all together.

[attorneyatlol]

This is a little more serious than political views, but I understand the thought behind what you're saying.

[truthinfortune.livejournal.com]

Why don't you be a little more specific then?

[nonesodangerous.livejournal.com]

It depends on why you can't look past those things.

[attorneyatlol]

Because you know they're wrong?

[nonesodangerous.livejournal.com]

What makes them wrong to you?

[eyes-starlit.livejournal.com]

I think, sir, that you have already made your decision. And in this particular circumstance, no one but yourself can answer these questions.

[attorneyatlol]

Sorry...?

[Locked]

[eyes-starlit.livejournal.com]

I apologise, but I read you conversations with both Tyki and Mr Marquise. I assumed that these questions were in response to that. Was I mistaken?

[honestcop.livejournal.com]

That depends. Are you arguing over something like taste in music, or is it about a matter of principle?

[attorneyatlol]

...I wish it were as simple as taste in music.

[honestcop.livejournal.com]

I figured.

Aren't you a lawyer? You have a professional obligation not to tolerate certain things.

[know-sacrifice.livejournal.com]

I think it depends. Like, if it's something that's really serious, and you have a good reason for believing the stuff you do, then there's nothing wrong with it... But, like, if you're just being stubborn or something, then yeah, it's just being, like. Ignorant. Y'know?

[attorneyatlol]

Yeah... I get what you're saying, and I agree.

[philoxidizes]

It's rather a sliding scale, isn't it?

[samuraiprosecutor]

That would depend on the things you're having trouble looking past. Some things are inexcusable, despite some people's opinions to the contrary.