[quote=@mdk]

(IE IF UR A LIBRAL LOL) 

[/quote]

I would certainly consider myself to be a liberal.

[quote=@mdk]

The cowardice angle is this: if your version of the truth can't survive confrontation by the other side, it's probably not true. And if that's causing you to cut and run from whatever social circle you used to inhabit..... well..... that's pretty cowardly, innit? 

[/quote]

My principles aren't threatened by coming into contact with other view points. They aren't from a checklist. They are amalgams of my experience, research and introspection. There certainly are opinions which I consider to be pretty moronic, and dont care to legitimize by engaging with, but that isn't really what I'm talking about.

Let me pose a hypothetical.

Lets say I meet John. He seems nice enough and we get along well enough. We are associates, maybe even starting to be friends. One day John suggests that we should really restrict women's access to health and reproductive care and should vote for candidates who champion just such an agenda. I find this position to be both ridiculous and horrifying.

I now have a few options.

I can attempt to convince John that his position is wrong. This is both exhausting and usually pointless.

I can stop associating with John, judging that anyone that would hold such an opinion isn't anyone I want to count as a friend.

I can ignore John's opinion and continue our relationship. Basically the don't talk about politics or religion option.

What I am pondering is does this third option constitute moral cowardice? I know that John holds this horrible opinion and I'm artificially segregating it from the rest of our relationship. This is especially true because if I take the first option and fail to convince him, I am essentially forced to pick one of the later.