Discussion that challenges supposed mainstream beliefs and officially accepted stances

[4channel]

Some issues when discussed can cause a range of reactions. Sometimes they can lead to an awakening, the beginning of a journey to discovering something new, or they can can cause a certain type of reaction in a person who may not like what they hear. I think that it's all about how we choose to deal with the info we're hearing and how we process it.

Take the issues of let's say ....  fluoride and mobile phone tower radiation. The government has allowed the fluoridation of our water and they have allowed the construction of mobile phone towers in residential areas. Does that mean the water is safe to drink and it causes no ill affect? Does that mean that the mobile phone towers are safe?  What about the handsets. Are they safe for children to use and hold against their heads?

Well, we discuss these things and some people do react angrily to the people discussing these issues. Does this mean that we have to stop discussion that challenges the supposed official stance or challenges what we are told is the mainstream belief? Do we have to self-censor or have this in a [private group? I have noticed that in discussion forums or the media that racist beliefs are a;allowed a platform and yet issues that many folk feel that need to be addressed because of health concerns are not given the same platform. To me racism is abhorrent and yet in the media, it gets the pass ticket while issues that some call important to health freedom do not! Why is that?  Could it be political? What are your thoughts?

NOTE:

Spoiler

This is a discussion that some people here would be interested in while others may not be. Folks with opposing views are welcome as  always. Please, if someone has an issue with these topics being discussed or another member, could they refrain from any attacks on others or deliberately flooding this thread with off topic filler.

[icyfroth]

---

@tasfleur wrote:

4channel, perhaps there is a purpose to your "discussion that challenges supposed mainstream beliefs and officially accepted stances"  thread, but such a discussion is doomed to failure by its very nature.

It gives no real allowance for what people really would like to safely and confidently post as their personal opinion without some, who have long term self imposed tunnel vision, attacking them.

---

Ok I'm answering this even though your post was to 4channel, Tas.

Putting forward personal opinions for discussion are one thing.

Getting personal with insults and derision if there's disagreement, is another.

[davewil1964]

Or non-mainstream opinions that don't accord with the OP's own non-mainstream opinions.

Or mainstream opinions backed by real science.

[4channel]

---

@tasfleur wrote:

4channel, perhaps there is a purpose to your "discussion that challenges supposed mainstream beliefs and officially accepted stances"  thread, but such a discussion is doomed to failure by its very nature.

It gives no real allowance for what people really would like to safely and confidently post as their personal opinion without some, who have long term self imposed tunnel vision, attacking them.

---

Well there won't be any attacks from me tasfleur.

I do confess though to having one vision I won't deviate from. That is the vision of people being able to discuss certain topics abouut helth-issues openly and in freedom. And if people disagree then that's fine by me. They should just do it without silly name calling or character assassination. Sadly for racist bigots I don't support that and I'd suggest they do it under their own rock. I wish bullies could follow them.

[tasfleur]

There once were some posters called "suspects",

Who someone decided were rejects,

Our fun and joy spread,

By the end of the thread,

So "suspects" had made themselves "respects"

                  

[tasfleur]

Getting personal with insults and derision if there's disagreement, is another.

That is exactly right.  I agree that that is the worst behaviour.  So those who do that should think about that... like calling people "usual suspects" etc ... whatever that is supposed to mean.

People are just people.  Healthy discussion and debate should be civil and polite, even where there is disagreement.

[not_for_sale2024]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

---

Ok I'm answering this even though your post was to 4channel, Tas.

Putting forward personal opinions for discussion are one thing.

Getting personal with insults and derision if there's disagreement, is another.

---

[davewil1964]

---

@tasfleur wrote:

Getting personal with insults and derision if there's disagreement, is another.

That is exactly right.  I agree that that is the worst behaviour.  So those who do that should think about that... like calling people "usual suspects" etc ... whatever that is supposed to mean.

People are just people.  Healthy discussion and debate should be civil and polite, even where there is disagreement.

---

Unless they are racist bigots. With or without any proof. Which, I suppose, is the subject of this thread.

[tasfleur]

I haven't seen you attacking anyone 4channel ... but looking back on some threads, there have often been attacks on people who do not agree with each other.

[tasfleur]

Unless they are racist bigots. With or without any proof. Which, I suppose, is the subject of this thread.

Yes Dave, and that's what makes it (the subject) near impossible to navigate safely.

[4channel]

---

@tasfleur wrote:

Unless they are racist bigots. With or without any proof. Which, I suppose, is the subject of this thread.

Yes Dave, and that's what makes it (the subject) near impossible to navigate safely.

---

The subject is possible to navigate safely. It applies to health related issues. lSimple solution is ....

* People who don't like open discussion on issues such as fluoride, mobile phone radiation can contribute sensibly as to why they think these open discussions should not be allowed.

* People who don't like the idea of people discussing the right to discuss these issues openly can  contrubute sensibly as to why they think these open discussions should not be allowed. 

* People who are not capable or willing to do this can move on to another thread,

* With racists I believe that their hate isn't a good thing so they shouldn't be doing it openly in a forum like this that has people of all ethnicities.