What was said to me earlier in this thread?
Epykat wrote:According to you and yours we're all stupid, dense, thick, lying NIMBYs who have no right to defend a 'dog's toilet' or dare to question how wonderful this is all going to be for the 'poor suffering children' and the WHOLE community. This is CLEARLY your opinion but not everybody's.
As it happens I have friends who are strongly opposed to the school going on the park, as well as acquaintances I admire who have strong misgivings. I don't find their reasoning convincing, but it is sincere and I don't take issue with them having a difference of opinion.
I also understand why those living close to the site may not be happy. If you're at the top of Park Avenue you're on a fairly quiet road with a view out to grass and trees. Build a school and it won't be so quiet, you will probably have more crisp packets in your front garden, and the view won't be so good. I'm not surprised that people living there are on the whole not too keen.
I also recognise that some people will not accept building on greenspace as a point of principle. Fair enough. Again I don't find that convincing since every home, hospital, school and shop, depends on having built on what was once greenspace, and homes, hospitals, schools and shops are pretty useful. So I'd think the more realistic approach would be weighing the pros of building against the cons of losing greenspace. However, that's just my view.
And everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But people aren't entitled to their own facts. And as soon as anyone goes beyond expressing a simple opinion, which is beyond contestation, to attempting to JUSTIFY that opinion by reference to 'facts', then they make a claim that is itself open to scrutiny and criticism. A claim that can be measured, however imperfectly, against observable reality.
Anyone is entitled to to express their opinion. And other people (within the bounds of whatever forum they are in) are entitled to express their opinions on how silly or ill informed those opinions are. See how that whole
"entitled to express an opinion" thing works?
Going back to the quote above,
Epykat expressed an opinion about my opinions, and that is entirely fair.
Epykat should indeed be allowed to express that opinion on my opinions.
But by the same token I should be allowed the same freedom to express my opinion that
Epykat's opinions on my opinions have no factual basis on anything I have actually said, don't accord with what I do actually think, and are, in fact, simply bullshit.
