last day (21 days later) » 

23:58
48
Q: Toddler being taught to cuss by older kids. How to deal with rude language at social gatherings?

MaKoI took my 9 year old son to a little social gathering with some kids from different sporting activities. Some of the families attending this gathering come from a very "rough" background. One of the boys about the age of my son was teaching his baby brother (around 3 years old) to say really rud...

ESR
ESR
@thumbtackthief you are against people intervening when they see something they deem to be immoral?
@ESR That's quite a slippery slope. Is it okay for people to "intervene" if they see people wearing mixed fabrics? Unmarried couples holding hands in public? Women showing their ankles? Same-sex couples? I'm against people "intervening" when they see something they deem to be immoral, because I deem imposing one's morality on others to be immoral.
ESR
ESR
@Beofett a slippery slope indeed, as you are now implying you would also not intervene if you saw someone being attacked, or robbed, unless you want to argue that certain things are objectively immoral.
@ESR Now you've gone straight to a strawman. There's a pretty strong difference between "I won't intervene if I witnessed something immoral [that does not directly involve me, because it isn't valid to ignore the context]" and "I would ignore any illegal activities". Morality is hardly the sole framework by which wrongdoing, and cause for intervention, can be judged.
ESR
ESR
@Beofett if you say "I'm against people "intervening" when they see something they deem to be immoral, because I deem imposing one's morality on others to be immoral.", then call my first example a strawman, then you were clearly not sincere with your original claim, which is what I was trying to demonstrate with my "strawman" example.
23:58
@ESR you raise a valid point about extreme examples, so I'll temper my previous comment with the phrases extremely careful instead of "against", and "for issues short of personal harm or danger" after "morality". I'm not following your logic about "sincerity" at all, however. You did engage in a strawman argument, by claiming that I was implying something that I was not (that I would not interfere if I witnessed an assault, based on the assumption that morality is the only motivation for intervention).
However, we are now well off-topic, and we should move to chat if you wish to engage in further discussion.
ESR
ESR
@Beofett to me it sounds like all you have to do is qualify your statement with "when illegal".

  last day (21 days later) »