:
|
That quote is an excellent one, however jokes and arguments can not be equated to physical assault.
|
Not directly, of course – physical harm represents a more immediate threat to anyone and so is considered worse. But it’s an analogy which makes the point that taking an action that brings harm to another should be considered a bad thing to do, and we can assume that this is regardless of the
amount of harm it would cause. Doing even a small amount of harm to another is still a negative action and should be avoided, even if it has no long-term repercussions.
:
|
Everyone has the right to insult everyone.
|
Everyone has the
right, but people do not always have the
cause; and then there is also the right to response, which can include repercussions for the person doing the insulting which often makes it counterproductive for them to do it even if there
was adequate cause.
Thought exercise: you’re walking down the street and you pass another person going the opposite way. They shove into you as you pass one another. Do you turn around and shout an insult at them? What if they look stronger than you? What if they look weaker than you? If not, why not?
And the reverse: As above, you’re walking down the street and you pass another person going the opposite way. In this case you do not make any kind of contact with them. Do you turn around and shout an insult them? If not, why not?
:
|
You block them, you don't cry about it though.
|
This makes the assumption that it is possible to block them, and that the offence in question can never be bad enough to cause upset. It’s easy to come up with situations where one or both of these is not the case.