So when I say I disagree I mean because I don't have the specific example, I can't say i agree, whereas I've agreed with many of your past posts.
But, wouldn't this leave you in the middle, non-committal? Taking a position of disagreement is taking a position without context, isn't it?
To me, it's something that betters the life of at least part of the population without trampling on the rights of orders.
This is an issue, because people claim "their rights" on anything these days. Anything that makes them feel bad, means their rights have been trampled. Do you see what the post is about now? Everyone can make themselves a victim.
But, wouldn't this leave you in the middle, non-committal? Taking a position of disagreement is taking a position without context, isn't it?
Yes, you have a point there. But you have to consider the fact that in the absence of a guarantee, disagreement comes easier. I think so at least.
Anything that makes them feel bad, means their rights have been trampled
That's exactly why I mentioned context. Ultimately, it boils down to what each person believes is a right or not. Depending on what I have in mind,I could completely agree or disagree with everything you said. But because it's safer to not agree without definitive examples. Noncommittal is the safe option.
Some people make ridiculous demands, but a lot of demands people consider ridiculous, I am fine with.
Everyone can make themselves a victim.
The truth is often, you often can't change others,only yourself, which is why "pulling yourself by your bootstraps is often the best option, but that doesn't make you less of a victim