no, listen, i don't know what you think a debate with somebody like jordan peterson would be like.

so long as he didn't make any factual errors, i'd probably let him finish. without interrupting him.

and, i'm not likely to say much besides "that's nice.", or "you're entitled to your opinion."....

...because i ultimately don't have any interest in winning a debate with somebody like this. or really any interest in bothering to listen to him express his viewpoints on the matter at all.

it's of no relevance to me.

in the end, i'd be more likely to make an argument about the uselessness of bourgeois rights - and how rights aren't something that come from a legislature, but something that come from lived experience.

which isn't to say i don't support the amendments, so much as to suggest that i don't think they're going to actually make anybody's lives better.

i made no effort to agitate for these amendments.

because, news flash: i'm not going to follow the law, anyways. i haven't up to now. if the thing gets defeated, or reversed, i'm not going to change my behaviour, either.

so, it's only at the moment that he tries to physically intervene that i have some reason to care what he thinks. and, at that point, i'm more likely to call the police than i am to try and debate with him.

individual rights aren't up for debate like this. we take them for ourselves. and, we fight with those that want to restrict them.