Do you really expect me to say that on camera? /hard cut

How so? Parties pushing for asylum reform are becoming more popular?

Good write up, thanks!

You have to agree to do it, but you don’t have to lay out a plan or timeline to do it.

Thank you for this detailed reply.

I think we’ve found the crux of our 2x points of view:

1. Without a definition of a disinformation campaign it is difficult to set rules that can be enforced. Example: do religious leaflets count as disinformation as they aren’t based on scientific fact? If not then why is there an exemption for that case and not others?

2. I preface this with: I am not in the field but am biased to the views of the British NHS. The scientific sources you’ve listed, though through, are contradicted by other scientific sources (note, I’m not talking about “these are my facts” but actual institutional research).

Source: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/treatment/

Puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones

Puberty blockers (gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues) are not available to children and young people for gender incongruence or gender dysphoria because there is not enough evidence of safety and clinical effectiveness.

So in summary there are 2x challenges I see:

1. Reputable scientific sources do not agree on this issue.

2. Applying a purely scientific principle will break existing norms and allowances. Principles agrees for this area and applied to other areas will cause an impact.

I’m keen to get your views on this as this is where my own thought processes usually get stuck.

Sorry for long text replies but this is helping with forming a more concrete view for myself :)

Good points. I agree with the paradox of tolerance and your other points.

Thank you for taking the time to reply. This type of discussion is why in use social.media but it is rare to get past the partisan brigading.

Civil disobedience is an interesting point in this case. Personally, I probably would have acted as this Canadian woman did.

What I am struggling with is understanding what counts as a disinformation campaign. I read in your post that you’d answer this as a society and with research however, if you were put in charge of this research tomorrow, do you have a draft definition of a disinformation campaign?

I ask as I try to see the world in black and white and steer clear of the grey however, this is rarely possible.

Free speech being a good example. It’s either a 1 or 0.

Hypothetically (because I’m interested and not trying to start an argument) would you ban the delivery of leaflets for a pro Trans party that was authoritarian?

P.S. I agree with you points :)

A different analogy would be a right wing person refusing to deliver left wing mail. Example might be something for a ‘Woke’ support group.

Another could be, Atheists refusing to deliver religious letters of Christmas cards.

My point is , we can’t leave it to individuals to decide these things in isolation.

Who decides what is hurtful though?

If it is the person delivering the leaflets then a Nazi postal worker can decide not to deliver postal votes as they see democracy as hurtful to their cause.