But when we look at potential for harm, not all things are going to be equal. That's a simple fact.
No, it is not a "simple fact." It is your political opinion, turbo-charged by a weaponized rhetoric ("these harms" and "simple fact") and nomenclature ("erasure"), that serves to silence any and all debate by demonizing those who oppose that view.
All things not having equal potential for harm is not simple fact? What? Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.
A simple question: If words are so powerless, why are you using them? You are conflating efficiency with potential. Every war in history has occurred by way of well chosen (even if often morally ill chosen) words. A single weapon can kill many but words can command entire armies, incite far far greater harm than any single conventional weapon. Even if the words do not harm you directly, the actions they incite can kill you or worse.
I don't agree with the saying in a literal sense - words can definitely hurt. I'm bringing it up because it illustrates not everything is equally harmful. Which goes to the heart of the matter: yes, we all have our rights and are all entitled to our own sensibilities, even if that means those can occasionally be in opposition. But from a moral - personal morality, not societal ethics which might be adjudicated by a judge - point of view, when that happens most people will (in spite of the witty pun from Master and Commander) agree that the lesser evil should win out. If I get hurt by your actions and you get hurt by not being allowed those actions, whichever one of us is hurt more will usually be considered to be morally in the right to demand the other to cease whatever is causing hurt.
edit: to bring it back to the topic at hand, in very simple terms, when my desire to play a certain type of character or as a DM introduce a certain type of conflict clashes with the sensibilities of someone else at the table, the morally right solution is to see whoever is hurt more and side with that party. There is no clear rule or argument that determines the person with the sensibilities is always in the right or always in the wrong (I think they usually would be, but that's just my opinion and basically worthless theory compared to the practice of an actual occurance) and it's actually quite likely both sides will have some arguments in their favour - but the bottom line is that one side will be more right than the other because not everything is equal.
Locking thread due to it having gone wildly off topic, OP not replying in some time, and many users not respecting site rules on appropriate topics and manner of conduct.
I don't agree with the saying in a literal sense - words can definitely hurt. I'm bringing it up because it illustrates not everything is equally harmful. Which goes to the heart of the matter: yes, we all have our rights and are all entitled to our own sensibilities, even if that means those can occasionally be in opposition. But from a moral - personal morality, not societal ethics which might be adjudicated by a judge - point of view, when that happens most people will (in spite of the witty pun from Master and Commander) agree that the lesser evil should win out. If I get hurt by your actions and you get hurt by not being allowed those actions, whichever one of us is hurt more will usually be considered to be morally in the right to demand the other to cease whatever is causing hurt.
edit: to bring it back to the topic at hand, in very simple terms, when my desire to play a certain type of character or as a DM introduce a certain type of conflict clashes with the sensibilities of someone else at the table, the morally right solution is to see whoever is hurt more and side with that party. There is no clear rule or argument that determines the person with the sensibilities is always in the right or always in the wrong (I think they usually would be, but that's just my opinion and basically worthless theory compared to the practice of an actual occurance) and it's actually quite likely both sides will have some arguments in their favour - but the bottom line is that one side will be more right than the other because not everything is equal.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Locking thread due to it having gone wildly off topic, OP not replying in some time, and many users not respecting site rules on appropriate topics and manner of conduct.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here