For example on an alternate history board I'm posting a bit of amateur fiction and some liberal posts a really stupid statement as a reply:
Question. Is Stone simply lying or is her background one of ardent conservatism/reactionism? Communism, like laissez faire capitalism, fascism and other extreme ideologies are responsible for a lot of evil and destruction but to automatically brand all forms of socialism as evil and ignore other creeds that cause similar problems suggests a very bigoted viewpoint.
Note this is coming from a liberal. I recognise even moderate social democracy as flawed when it assumes automatic and unchanging rules apply and prefer a more balanced mix of forces as the best basis for stable economic and social develop.
This twit makes no distinction between opposites and can't see the impossibility of compromise between life and death.
I decline to enter into a flame war.
(Oh, Evelyn is a gender neutral name and I described the character as being a young man.)
Yes, this twit failed to see that a particular character was in fact a man. And having been expelled from at least two forums for flaming I am now adverse in entering a flame war.
So how does the twit respond?
I think that answers my question. Since you seem to be saying your a bigot I will assume the story has no merit. Bye.
Let's see? I object to despotism, death, and destruction, therefore I'm some kind of evil being?
And because I won't reinforce his delusion of virtue he departs in a huff.
The problem with evolution is that it doesn't act fast enough.