Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And yet....I don't care that you don't care....
What would you do if you did care though? Would you call GLAAD and try to have me suspended from my job because I expressed an opinion you disliked? The real question is who do we think should decide what's acceptable speech and what is not. Should the majority of citizens decide what is allowable speech content or should small activist organizations decide? Should republicans decide or should democrats decide? I personally think I should be the only one who decides our speech code but I suspect not everybody would agree with my views. BUT! I could silence the people who disagreed with my views. How dare those intolerant people disagree with me! I shall have them all suspended from their jobs! I shall call it the Candycorn act of 2013. There will be no more hate speech, no more hurt feelings, no more intolerance, no more freedom. All will be perfect for the collective. You're all under my control! Make me pancakes!!!
Sure. Fair warning, though; those aren't chocolate chips.
The arrogance of men stupid enough to make demands astonishes me.
What would you do if you did care though? Would you call GLAAD and try to have me suspended from my job because I expressed an opinion you disliked? The real question is who do we think should decide what's acceptable speech and what is not. Should the majority of citizens decide what is allowable speech content or should small activist organizations decide? Should republicans decide or should democrats decide? I personally think I should be the only one who decides our speech code but I suspect not everybody would agree with my views. BUT! I could silence the people who disagreed with my views. How dare those intolerant people disagree with me! I shall have them all suspended from their jobs! I shall call it the Candycorn act of 2013. There will be no more hate speech, no more hurt feelings, no more intolerance, no more freedom. All will be perfect for the collective. You're all under my control! Make me pancakes!!!
Sure. Fair warning, though; those aren't chocolate chips.
The arrogance of men stupid enough to make demands astonishes me.
Not only am I arrogant but I am also forgetful since I don't recall giving you permission to talk.
I don't embarass my employer. If you're self employed, you do however.
Phil Robertson wouldn't have embarrassed his employer either if he had released his insulting remarks on an online site under an assumed name where hate speech can be fun and safe.
Now can the Henny Youngman one liners and make me some damn pancakes!
As I've always said about the GOP:
To women..."Make me some Pie."
To minorities..."Serve my pie."
To the poor..."Get your own pie"
To the non-christians..."IF you were a "real" American, you'd agree our pie is best.
I guess all crazy stereotypes have some truth to them.
Sure. Fair warning, though; those aren't chocolate chips.
The arrogance of men stupid enough to make demands astonishes me.
Not only am I arrogant but I am also forgetful since I don't recall giving you permission to talk.
I can't remember where I got the impression you were worth talking to.
So conservatives now wish to tell me that I am out of line to find this:
"Women with women, men with men, they committed indecent acts with one another, and they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions. Theyre full of murder, envy, strife, hatred. They are insolent, arrogant, God-haters. They are heartless, they are faithless, they are senseless, they are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil."
spoken by Phil Robertson a few years ago,
objectionable.
Yes, I'm the villain if I don't quietly and obediently tolerate that sort of hate speech.
So conservatives now wish to tell me that I am out of line to find this:
"Women with women, men with men, they committed indecent acts with one another, and they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions. Theyre full of murder, envy, strife, hatred. They are insolent, arrogant, God-haters. They are heartless, they are faithless, they are senseless, they are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil."
spoken by Phil Robertson a few years ago,
objectionable.
Yes, I'm the villain if I don't quietly and obediently tolerate that sort of hate speech.
So conservatives now wish to tell me that I am out of line to find this:
"Women with women, men with men, they committed indecent acts with one another, and they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions. Theyre full of murder, envy, strife, hatred. They are insolent, arrogant, God-haters. They are heartless, they are faithless, they are senseless, they are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil."
spoken by Phil Robertson a few years ago,
objectionable.
Yes, I'm the villain if I don't quietly and obediently tolerate that sort of hate speech.
where did you see "hate speech"
you have to be totally retarded to consider it a "hate speech".
So conservatives now wish to tell me that I am out of line to find this:
"Women with women, men with men, they committed indecent acts with one another, and they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions. Theyre full of murder, envy, strife, hatred. They are insolent, arrogant, God-haters. They are heartless, they are faithless, they are senseless, they are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil."
spoken by Phil Robertson a few years ago,
objectionable.
Yes, I'm the villain if I don't quietly and obediently tolerate that sort of hate speech.
where did you see "hate speech"
you have to be totally retarded to consider it a "hate speech".
Phil Robertson Homophobic Past Resurfaces In 2010 Sermon
So conservatives now wish to tell me that I am out of line to find this:
"Women with women, men with men, they committed indecent acts with one another, and they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions. Theyre full of murder, envy, strife, hatred. They are insolent, arrogant, God-haters. They are heartless, they are faithless, they are senseless, they are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil."
spoken by Phil Robertson a few years ago,
objectionable.
Yes, I'm the villain if I don't quietly and obediently tolerate that sort of hate speech.
Words written many years before Robertson spoke them.
Romans Chapter 1.
You mean like the RNC threatening to boycott NBC/MSNBC debates if those networks ran a Hillary Clinton documentary?
You mean that kind of tolerance and bullying?
Entertain us...
Is there no deflection you won't throw up so you can avoid admitting you're wrong?
I don't believe there was a call to boycott MSNBC if they did not cancel this political ad masquerading as an unbiased production. There was a threat to not work with them if it was aired, but no call for everyone to stop watching them or calling for sponsors to stop advertising, thus making it impossible for them to make money.
If you have not agreed to pull the programming prior to the start of the RNCs Summer Meeting on August 15, I will seek a binding vote of the RNC stating that the committee will neither partner with you in 2016 primary debates nor sanction primary debates which you sponsor, Mr. Priebus wrote in letters he released Monday."
I don't see the call for anyone to be fired from every job they have...do you?
Every example you throw up actually shows how different the attack on Robertson by GLAAD is.
Exactly as I predicted.
Every example I put up has proven what partisan hackery this thread was, made all the worse by the pretense that it wasn't partisan hackery.
Sigh. I think only a liberal could see making a choice between two political candidates as 'silencing' somebody. Or thinks that is no different than hurting somebody purely because that somebody expressed a personal opinion.
So conservatives now wish to tell me that I am out of line to find this:
"Women with women, men with men, they committed indecent acts with one another, and they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions. Theyre full of murder, envy, strife, hatred. They are insolent, arrogant, God-haters. They are heartless, they are faithless, they are senseless, they are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil."
spoken by Phil Robertson a few years ago,
objectionable.
Yes, I'm the villain if I don't quietly and obediently tolerate that sort of hate speech.
Words written many years before Robertson spoke them.
Romans Chapter 1.
you expect a leftard to be at least superficially educated on the subject?
This doesnt make any sense.
No one is being silenced.
What is it with the right and this bizarre misperception?
PROOF?
SO, as long as gays are denigrated and their lifestyle is compared to bestiality, and they remain SILENT, that is your version of tolerance.
Do you think Sean Hannity giving out the numbers on the air of Dubuc and A&E Chairwoman Abbe Raven should be tolerated?
Thats clearly the rights position.
If youre gay or belong to another minority and youre subject to a hateful, ignorant attack of lies, youre supposed to just shut up, stay quite, and take the abuse without protest because thats the consequence of being a minority, particularly if youre hated by so many as are gays.
Nobody is saying the GLAAD should shut up, stay quiet and take abuse without protest.
What is wrong with you authoritarian types and this bizarre misconception?
What about the Dixie Chics?
A lot of selective reading going on. Hey those of you with reading dysfunction: If I say that the Bible is against adultery, lying, and cheating, that is not saying that those who lie are guilty of adultery or cheating. (Muttering I don't know why I bother because they'll never get it.)
But even that is not the point of the thread which is the issue of tolerance and allowing people to be who and what they are.
Phil Robertson may believe the Bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin, but he was perfectly willing to allow gay people to be who and what they are. He wasn't out attacking anybody or asking, let alone demanding, that anybody be punished or harmed in any way because he or she is gay.
GLAAD was not willing to allow Phil Robertson to be who and what he is which is a fundamentalist Christian who interprets what the Bible says in a fundamentalist way. They demanded that he be punished in a material way.
Some here think that is just hunky dory okay. Some of us don't.
Interesting, you focus all your hatred and blame on GLAAD, yet it was a very powerful corporate executive who made the decision.
A decision the corporate executive would never have made had it not been the pressure applied by GLAAD.
The topic is tolerance. GLAAD wants tolerance for its members--tolerance that allows gays and lesbians be who and what they are and not be punished for that. It was GLAAD who would not extend the same tolerance to Phil Robertson and allow Robertson to be who and what he is.
Once more I would respectfully ask my friends and my foes to please observe the request for civility in this thread. Please take the personal insults elsewhere. Do me the kindness of not responding to them when some insist on putting them out there.
The thread topic is not what we think about each other. The thread topic is not about free speech or what we consider acceptable or what we do not consider acceptable or what is legal or what is constitutional. This thread is not about our choices to do or not do business with or patronize those with whom we disagree.
The thread topic is quite focused and quite simple.
Tolerance cannot be a one way street. If we expect others to allow us to be who and what we are no matter how much they think we are wrong or do not agree with our beliefs, opinions, or lifestyle, then the same courtesy must be extended to others.
Phil Robertson believes the Bible teaches a particular concept re homosexuality. But he does not suggest that homosexuals should not be allowed to live as they choose, say what they think, be who they are. He is adamently opposed to disrespecting or harming gay people in any way.
GLAAD almost certainly sees Phil Robertson's faith as wrong, hateful, fanatical, delusional, etc. But they are not willing to allow Phil Robertson to live as he chooses, say what he thinks, or be who he is. Instead they demand that he be punished, hurt, destroyed for no other reason than he expressed an opinion that they didn't like.
It is one thing to say that another person is wrong, out of line, hateful, disrespectful. It is quite another to try to physically or materially harm another person because you don't like them or respect them or agree with them.
Interesting, you focus all your hatred and blame on GLAAD, yet it was a very powerful corporate executive who made the decision.
A decision the corporate executive would never have made had it not been the pressure applied by GLAAD.
The topic is tolerance. GLAAD wants tolerance for its members--tolerance that allows gays and lesbians be who and what they are and not be punished for that. It was GLAAD who would not extend the same tolerance to Phil Robertson and allow Robertson to be who and what he is.
How do you know that.
