Update And Another Question

Hi there. I'm sorry, I haven't been keeping with the blog of late; there's several reasons for that. Firstly, I've been tied up with a lot of hectic happenings of recent. Some good, others bad. Sometimes, escapism from it all isn't justifiable, let alone it actually serving its intended purpose. There's questions to be answered, and notions to be put to rest, and all of that, and I want to plough through all that just to sleep easier at night.

Secondly, I've had "politics block". This phrase might appear as a ridiculous exaggeration, but there's just times when it seems as if you've said all that's to be said, and that's it. I'm not recovered from that notion entirely, to be honest. In fact, my last post was merely a question on my mind, put out to the public domain, just because I had nothing else to talk about.

So, with this, I wouldn't expect any in depth political analysis (Pfffft, you're entirely in the wrong blog if you expect that from me!), but I do have a rather important question to ask.

Okay, here goes; and I want you to think about this one carefully, and answer with complete honesty (Yes, there is a point behind this question, which I'll reveal at a later date):

Supposing you're part of an oppressed group, who was discriminated on both an institutional basis, and a social one. Supposing there was a prominent, well known and erudite speaker from your oppressed group, who campaigned heavily for your group's rights against the oppressors. Yet supposing this eloquent campaigner was also partly infamous for bigotry, or bigoted comments against another group of people (Oppressed group or not); if you had FULL knowledge of this campaigner's bigotry against the other group, would you still support both them, and their actions within the general campaign?

Thanks; I'll look forward to your input on this :)