Quote:Like I said, there are some things I wouldn't bother to question because they're so common. I would believe they're easily possible, and in an absence of evidence I would presume it could be true but wouldn't assume it is.

 

On the other hand there are some things so absurd that I wouldn't begin to believe they're possible without some documentation.

 

Anyone who believed the idea that someone was "fired in CA" for having a southern accent was likely enough to believe it was probably true without any documentation could benefit from a bit of introspection.

 

If you don't read them, they mustn't be a problem, right? The media publishes what sells; they don't care about frequency or validity.

 

Why is this so absurd? It's a stupid reason to fire someone, and most reasonable people wouldn't fire someone before of their accent. It isn't like we haven't seen an inclusive-oriented attitude from the left that often leaves those that don't fit the mold (ironically) outside the group. This really isn't all that impossible. While I agree that there should definitely be something to support such a claim before people blindly accept it, it doesn't mean, however, that this idea is all that absurd. 

 

In other words, it appears that your idea that those people, that did accept it, lack any potential at self-reflection is only based on opposing ideological beliefs. Especially when it's such a common occurrence on both sides. Believing something you read doesn't mean you're incapable of self-reflection. Believing that other people lack that ability because they read something on the internet tells me that you're more likely to fit into that category more than the other way around.

---