Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now you've expanded the definition of political so much I simply don't care if something is political or not, the word has lost all meaning. You've also completely avoid my question, do you want the majority of the world who don't think society should accept homosexuality to be voicing their opinions more?
> You've also completely avoid my question I didn't understand it tbh, and I still don't... I don't consider all opinions to have equal value but I do value people being able to express opinions that I disagree with. That doesn't mean someone should be voicing opinions about e.g. homosexuality in a place where it has no relevance (Typical context: a github issue discussion). In those contexts I just expect everyone t…
The point is to highlight your hypocrisy. You say you want influential people to be more overtly political but you really only want people you agree with to be more overtly political.
> That doesn't mean someone should be voicing opinions about e.g. homosexuality in a place where it has no relevance (Typical context: a github issue discussion)
This was my point all along, it seems like you do agree that there is such a thing as being apolitical. So why is context only important now? Why is this political position out of context on a GitHub discussion but in context for a football player or someone doing backflips on a bike?