Quote:
Originally Posted by Infinit47
It's a social contract, and if you don't hold up your end of accepting/tolerating/including everyone then you don't also get the benefit of being accepted/tolerated/included by everyone else.
|
This take is illiberal.
A truly liberal position is to state that people can live how they choose as long as they are not pursuing activity that is harmful to someone else.
Choosing not to endorse someone or an idea is not the same as performing an activity that harms them. In your context of a social contract, the only thing that violates that social contract is when you attempt to do harm to another person. In Reimer's case, he did not do that and made very clear statements that he would uphold his end of the social contract by welcoming everyone.
Reimer's position on LGBTQ+ people might be distasteful and incorrect, but ideas themselves don't violate the fundamentals of a liberal society. However, trying to coerce him into making public statements does violate the fundamentals of a liberal society.