operator-speaking said: It’s a … “nuanced” aspect of my personal interpretation of these concepts that brought me to think it was an interesting question - your rephrasing covers the same ground, answer away :)
To which I said
I think you are trying to ask, is it a violation of ones rights to say something offensive?
I’m more than happy to answer if I’m understanding you correctly?
No, offensive speak doesn’t violate the individual rights of anyone. Offensive speak doesn’t violate the property rights of anyone. Offensive speak is just that, offensive, which is subjective to the individual.
A lot of people find a lot of what I say offensive. Why? Because I’m anti state. I’m anti war. I’m anti military. I’m anti police. And the list could go on and on.
Just because someone finds what you’re talking about “offensive” doesn’t mean it violates the non aggression principle.
"Offensive" speech is completely subjective to the individual listening/hearing it.
But which that said, I’m a complete believer and advocate of non-violate communication. I don’t think anyone is stupid, wrong, or dumb. I think peoples believes are stupid, wrong, or dumb. People aren’t dumb believes are.
I think it is prudent that people should only criticize ideas and not people, no matter how ignorant they may seem. It does no good to attack the person. Attacking the person will only make people strengthen their views.
But if say to someone “how does that idea make you feel” and go from their they won’t feel as threatened. As asking someone who they feel isn’t attacking them.
Telling someone they are stupid, comes off as an attack.