In Politics and Society: Is it Intolerant to be Intolerant of Intolerance?

[G.T.]

In case you cant figure it out I'll save some time: the questions all fall into the category of: quibbling over minutia.

 

[hunarcy]

No, they werent the foundation you thought they were otherwise you would have known they were rhetorical. Its over your head bro, no big deal.

For example, the answers you provided to EACH ONE of them i agreed with 100%.

So? Think again.

Sorry, you're not on topic and I've given you all the attention you deserved Have a GREAT day.

 

[G.T.]

The topic is a sophmoric attempt to place bully fighters, justice doers, into a pidgeon hole, a label., the topic is partisan in spirit, and the topic is a piss poor attempt at even being a pseudo intellectual.

 

[hunarcy]

The topic is a sophmoric attempt to place bully fighters, justice doers, into a pidgeon hole, a label., the topic is partisan in spirit, and the topic is a piss poor attempt at even being a pseudo intellectual.

ROTFLMAO! Of course it is. Certainly not worthy of your talents.

Good night

 

[WillReadmore]

Yes, he was talking about sin, not specifically about homosexuality.

He labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, and he equated it with drunkenness and terrorism. Plus, your cut wasn't all he said.

I'm not sure what your point is here, but I don't think there is any way to downplay what he said in any significant way.

That’s because he has no ‘point.’

Otherwise you’re correct – the statements had nothing to do with accepted tenets of Christianity, and consequently religion is not being ‘attacked.'

Oh, he had a point, all right. He was quite clear about homosexuality.

And, I don't know why anyone would think that such attacks from people in the public eye would go unanswered.

 

[hunarcy]

He labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, and he equated it with drunkenness and terrorism. Plus, your cut wasn't all he said.

I'm not sure what your point is here, but I don't think there is any way to downplay what he said in any significant way.

That’s because he has no ‘point.’

Otherwise you’re correct – the statements had nothing to do with accepted tenets of Christianity, and consequently religion is not being ‘attacked.'

Oh, he had a point, all right. He was quite clear about homosexuality.

And, I don't know why anyone would think that such attacks from people in the public eye would go unanswered.

and that justifies GLAAD trying to blacklist him?

 

[WillReadmore]

He labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, and he equated it with drunkenness and terrorism. Plus, your cut wasn't all he said.

I'm not sure what your point is here, but I don't think there is any way to downplay what he said in any significant way.

Where did he claim it was a source of sin? And, are you claiming that there are "degrees" of sinning? Or, are you just so intolerant of the religious teachings that you can't understand what he was saying?

"The religious teachings"??

I assume you are aware that churches of a number of denominations marry same sex couples in more than a dozen of our states. And, other churches don't.

Yes, Christians pretty uniformly believe there are degrees of sinning. I don't know why that is of any interest in this case.

I refuse to "understand" what he was saying - at least to the extent that I don't care what he may have been trying to say or whatever else he was thinking. I only care about his words and what they mean in American English.

If he has some clarification he'd like to make because of inadvertently misrepresenting himself, fine. But, so far he's only doubled down on his bigotry.

 

[WillReadmore]

Yes, he was talking about sin, not specifically about homosexuality.

He labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, and he equated it with drunkenness and terrorism. Plus, your cut wasn't all he said.

I'm not sure what your point is here, but I don't think there is any way to downplay what he said in any significant way.

He labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, and he equated it with drunkenness and terrorism.

The only thing to downplay is your hyperbole!

Q: What, in your mind, is sinful?


“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

As far as Phil is concerned, he was literally born again. Old Phil—the guy with the booze and the pills—died a long time ago, and New Phil sees no need to apologize for him: “We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”

Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson Gives Drew Magary a Tour

As you point out, I nearly quoted the guy.

I'm not sure how that becomes hyperbolic.

 

[hunarcy]

I refuse to "understand" what he was saying - at least to the extent that I don't care what he may have been trying to say or whatever else he was thinking. I only care about his words and what they mean in American English.

And that makes you intolerant person who ends up banning books and blacklisting people who you don't agree with politically.

 

[hunarcy]

As you point out, I nearly quoted the guy.

I'm not sure how that becomes hyperbolic.

When you go from quoting him to creating the idea that he labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, it becomes hyperbole.

Another thing that intolerant people do to bolster their positions.

 

[WillReadmore]

I refuse to "understand" what he was saying - at least to the extent that I don't care what he may have been trying to say or whatever else he was thinking. I only care about his words and what they mean in American English.

And that makes you intolerant person who ends up banning books and blacklisting people who you don't agree with politically.

So, you're calling me a liar?

Or, is there a chance that you haven't been following along?

 

[WillReadmore]

As you point out, I nearly quoted the guy.

I'm not sure how that becomes hyperbolic.

When you go from quoting him to creating the idea that he labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, it becomes hyperbole.

Another thing that intolerant people do to bolster their positions.

Good lord! Read the quote. He said, “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men," etc.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

The funny thing of course is that if Duck Dynasty dad were a muslim then we wouldn't have to hear from the permanently aggrieved left wing class about the evils of the Koran and how important it is to limit free speech. This is why political correctness is corrosive. Political correctness allows religious bigotry as long as the religion is christianity. Just as political correctness allows free speech as long as it's the right kind of speech.

 

[Bfgrn]

The funny thing of course is that if Duck Dynasty dad were a muslim then we wouldn't have to hear from the permanently aggrieved left wing class about the evils of the Koran and how important it is to limit free speech. This is why political correctness is corrosive. Political correctness allows religious bigotry as long as the religion is christianity. Just as political correctness allows free speech as long as it's the right kind of speech.

Irony so thick. The TRUTH of the matter is if Phil Robertson were a Muslim, the right would be calling for him to be either arrested or deported.

You folks are retards.

 

[MeBelle]

He labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, and he equated it with drunkenness and terrorism. Plus, your cut wasn't all he said.

I'm not sure what your point is here, but I don't think there is any way to downplay what he said in any significant way.

He labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, and he equated it with drunkenness and terrorism.

The only thing to downplay is your hyperbole!

Q: What, in your mind, is sinful?


“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

As far as Phil is concerned, he was literally born again. Old Phil—the guy with the booze and the pills—died a long time ago, and New Phil sees no need to apologize for him: “We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”

Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson Gives Drew Magary a Tour

As you point out, I nearly quoted the guy.

I'm not sure how that becomes hyperbolic.

You took it out of context and put your own spin on his exact words.
He did not claim homosexuality was the root of all evil for cripes sake.
He said he loves everyone regardless of what he feels their shortcomings are.

Dude! You just contradicted yourself! What you're talking about ^^ is not what you're talking about here:

As you point out, I nearly quoted the guy.

I'm not sure how that becomes hyperbolic.

When you go from quoting him to creating the idea that he labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, it becomes hyperbole.

Another thing that intolerant people do to bolster their positions.

Good lord! Read the quote. He said, “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men," etc.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

The funny thing of course is that if Duck Dynasty dad were a muslim then we wouldn't have to hear from the permanently aggrieved left wing class about the evils of the Koran and how important it is to limit free speech. This is why political correctness is corrosive. Political correctness allows religious bigotry as long as the religion is christianity. Just as political correctness allows free speech as long as it's the right kind of speech.

Irony so thick. The TRUTH of the matter is if Phil Robertson were a Muslim, the right would be calling for him to be either arrested or deported.

You folks are retards.

Let's see if we can deconstruct what you just said, shall we?
Your perception of irony is based on your view that the right would want to arrest or deport a Muslim for explaining that homosexuality is a sin.
I'm going to assume your post was more of a knee jerk reaction than an actual thought process.
Now we have your last sentence. "You folks are Retards". LOL! Again, this last sentence seems to be a continuation of the original knee jerk reaction so I'll just laugh at the ineptitude of your "argument", which is becoming a pattern by the way.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The funny thing of course is that if Duck Dynasty dad were a muslim then we wouldn't have to hear from the permanently aggrieved left wing class about the evils of the Koran and how important it is to limit free speech. This is why political correctness is corrosive. Political correctness allows religious bigotry as long as the religion is christianity. Just as political correctness allows free speech as long as it's the right kind of speech.

Irony so thick. The TRUTH of the matter is if Phil Robertson were a Muslim, the right would be calling for him to be either arrested or deported.

You folks are retards.

If Phil Robertson were a muslim, the font type on FOX WOULD BE THIS BIG, 24/7 about him.

Of course, the real irony is that the undercurrent what what Robertson is saying is not far from Shariah law at all. I wonder if Robertson is a secret muslim and maybe not even a natural born US citizen.... sent to infiltrate the Conservative religious ranks of US American society?!?!?!?!?

 

[Statistikhengst]

He labeled homosexuality to be not just sin, but a source of sin, and he equated it with drunkenness and terrorism.

The only thing to downplay is your hyperbole!




Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson Gives Drew Magary a Tour

As you point out, I nearly quoted the guy.

I'm not sure how that becomes hyperbolic.

You took it out of context and put your own spin on his exact words.
He did not claim homosexuality was the root of all evil for cripes sake.
He said he loves everyone regardless of what he feels their shortcomings are.

Dude! You just contradicted yourself! What you're talking about ^^ is not what you're talking about here:

Oh, well heaven's sakes, of course he would NEVER do that!!!

I mean, he only lumped homosexuality in with bestiality and terrorism, starting with homosexuality. No, why of course he meant nothing by that.

And if I say that when you start with Christians, then it's just a short jump over to pedophiles and cannabals and mass murderers and stalkers and people who only bathe every two years, you would of course not be offended in the slightest to see the word "Christians" lumped in with all those other groups, right? Because it is free speech, right? And it's the same methodology Mr. Ducky Duck used. And gee, why should we ever use logic to connect the dots in what a person is saying, right?

Dear Lord, get over it.

I already said that I support his right to say whatever his little heart desires. But that doesn't make it any less informed, any less stupid or any less repugnant.

And it is fun as hell to watch many Righties here try to jump through as many hoops as possible and twist themselves into pretzels to justify what he said. Good God, there is no need to justify it. The man has the right to say it, just as I have the right to laugh or scorn at him for it. Only, what is simply my laughing and scorn, Righties love to call intolerance. They are like screaming babies when it comes to this stuff.

Geez....

 

[Statistikhengst]

This is a stupid assed question to entertain.

And yet it's provided over 1200 posts of entertainment.

I am most definitely entertained.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

The funny thing of course is that if Duck Dynasty dad were a muslim then we wouldn't have to hear from the permanently aggrieved left wing class about the evils of the Koran and how important it is to limit free speech. This is why political correctness is corrosive. Political correctness allows religious bigotry as long as the religion is christianity. Just as political correctness allows free speech as long as it's the right kind of speech.

Irony so thick. The TRUTH of the matter is if Phil Robertson were a Muslim, the right would be calling for him to be either arrested or deported.

You folks are retards.

If Phil Robertson were a muslim, the font type on FOX WOULD BE THIS BIG, 24/7 about him.

Of course, the real irony is that the undercurrent what what Robertson is saying is not far from Shariah law at all. I wonder if Robertson is a secret muslim and maybe not even a natural born US citizen.... sent to infiltrate the Conservative religious ranks of US American society?!?!?!?!?

I'm sure the font type on MSNBC and CNN would be equally as big, though obviously the opinions would be different. The undercurrent of what Robertson is saying may not be far from Shariah law in theory. However, I suspect no one is afraid of Robertson beheading any homosexuals.