Objective reality is not a slippery slope - let's look at your above examples.
1 - creationism - there is currently no evidence to suggest it is true, however you are welcome to your religious beliefs, so feel free to crack on with your own religious practises so long as they don't affect anyone negatively.
2 - This is an opinion, so you are entitled to your view.
3 - This is an opinion, so you are entitled to your view.
4 - This is an opinion, so you are entitled to your view.
Objective truth isn't believing the "right" thing.
Objective truth is accepting the facts as the facts - it's what society is basically based on.
The objective truth has been dissolved by the right since fox started basically, and has come to it's pinnacle with the terrorists in the capitol last week.
MM,
Are you content with your answers for 2, 3 and 4 ?
Indeed, people may be entitled to their view - but any negative answers could impact other people - so is "entitled to their view" the end of the matter ?
We are being asked:
"Do you believe other people should be allowed to do x, y or z. ? "
Surely the answer we give depends on how genuinely "liberal" we are ?
....With any variant of "no" being justified ?
The objective truth has been dissolved by the right since fox started basically, and has come to it's pinnacle with the terrorists in the capitol last week.
So "objectively", who were these "
terrorists in the capitol last week" ?
i.e. How many ?
Which bit of the Capitol ?
How identified ?
By what criteria "terrorists"?
Just wondering what an "objective truth" might look like"
There was no significant fraud was found (ie that could be deemed to be significant or potentially affecting to the results), despite numerous court cases being raised.
No one knows how "significant" because of the resistance to actually investigating the scores of witness statements and affidavits.
Almost all Court cases were thrown out on procedural grounds.
e.g. The Court having no locus to investigate claims - that being the role of other Agencies...
...or the Court having no power to instruct State Officials to investigate - so if they decline to do so, then "tips of icebergs" won't be investigated.
Which allows State Officials to say (imply):
"Based on the witness statements, the number of questionable votes wouldn't change the result (and we can't be bothered to look for any more.)"
If there had been fraud, simply put, they would've found it by now.
They have:
"
Georgia's top election official, Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, said there were just two confirmed cases of votes attributed to dead people."
Who knows how hard they looked, but when the BBC leads with "
no evidence of fraud", it lies.
Then there was the vote-flipping in Antrim County, Michigan.
Nearly 6,000 votes were wrongly given to Biden.
Apparently because an election Official, using a Dominion Tabulation Machine "accidentally" flipped a switch.
This was spotted when locals (who knew the area) queried the tally.
The "human error" was corrected.
So everything's rosy ??
Even assuming genuine error, surely the ease with which votes can be flipped should raise concerns ??
Have all Dominion Tabulation machines been checked for the relevant "switch" ?