>>719950258
you don't understand because based on your analogy, you think that one of the sides is correct
the be more accurate
>dying of thirst = bad
>dying from overhydration drowning your body = also bad
this is the way I see it, there has to be a balance, there is no side that is objectively ALWAYS correct, that is literally the point of democracy as defined by it's creators: that all sides must be considered and represented and that a middle ground must be found, because even the biggest asshole I've ever met has been right about one or two things, and even the nicest people I've met have held one or 2 completely insane opinions on some topics, but both sides would always have a point SOMETIMES, and to discount any opinion anyone says because they are "on the other side" and not even thinking about what they are saying is just willful ignorance, it's choosing to believe your own truth rather than accepting the possibility that you may be wrong about something, it reeks of arrogance that I feel is far too prevalent in the modern world.
