If you require a universally agreed upon legal definition of what is right or wrong you might do well reading some books on philosophy. Or pickup a random religious text and live by it if that’s what you prefer.
but according to guardian, “Bigotry” is really just a name for any opinion with which you happen to disagree.
Wow you totally misrepresented that link.
The linked article isn’t even about the meaning of the word bigot, its a debate between two people about whether a politician should use the word bigot.
One of the debaters asserts that “Bigotry is really just a name for any opinion with which you happen to disagree.” which is his personal opinion, not a statement by The Guardian.
The assertion is never supported, contradicts the dictionary, and isn’t shared by the other debater in the article.
Going by your name I assume English is not your first language.
[A bigot is someone] who will not listen to or accept the opinions of anyone who disagrees
To have a debate both parties have to listen to each other. They exchange arguments in favor of their point of view and in the best case one side convinces the other of their own point of view. That is not possible with someone unwilling to listen to or accept opinions of other people.
No
There are no universally agreed legal definitions of “intolerance” or “hate speech”.
If you require a universally agreed upon legal definition of what is right or wrong you might do well reading some books on philosophy. Or pickup a random religious text and live by it if that’s what you prefer.
There is no universally agreed-upon legal definition of “right” or “wrong.”
That’s exactly my point and the reason I think your reliance on a “universally agreed legal definition” is useless.
also
Popper did not advocate for pre-emptive censorship or deplatforming of fringe ideas themselves.
The paradox applies specifically to ideologies that seek to disallow debate entirely and dismantle open, democratic institutions.
not all “bigots” are against debate or democratic institutions.
also being any <pejorative> is subjective
As per the Oxford learners dictionary a bigot is per definition someone unwilling to debate.
but according to guardian, “Bigotry” is really just a name for any opinion with which you happen to disagree.
and in your link “debate” is not mentioned
Wow you totally misrepresented that link.
The linked article isn’t even about the meaning of the word bigot, its a debate between two people about whether a politician should use the word bigot.
One of the debaters asserts that “Bigotry is really just a name for any opinion with which you happen to disagree.” which is his personal opinion, not a statement by The Guardian.
The assertion is never supported, contradicts the dictionary, and isn’t shared by the other debater in the article.
Going by your name I assume English is not your first language.
To have a debate both parties have to listen to each other. They exchange arguments in favor of their point of view and in the best case one side convinces the other of their own point of view. That is not possible with someone unwilling to listen to or accept opinions of other people.