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

[G.T.]

This thread should have been ended before it started. It agitates me that someone could think of such a stupid fucking question - its sad that so many have argued it. Its a silly fucking question is the answer.

Am i a bully if i go around kicking bullies in the nuts? Well yea, i suppose if youre being an uber technical fucking ninny nit picker i am. But to most people - theres levels to life that are unspoken, so on a dork assed "technicality" one would BE a bully in this scenario, but most individuals with something between their ears can discern between the two - and "bullying" is unacceptable whereas "bullying bullies," to most, is called JUSTICE.

the thdead question is piddy paddying over minutia, and its annoying to the point where i was compelled to post that so many mother fuckers out that lack that common sense thinga majig.

 

[TemplarKormac]

There are holes in her logic, tommy. Such as "good people should push back on such bad acts & make the culturally unacceptable."

Know why? Because some people feel that the "good people" would not employ a person as a face of their company who views people as deviants in society simply because of their sexuality.

So theyre doing, in effect, what fox is saying "good people" should do, except each has a different definition of what is "bad."

If you dont find that to be inconsistent/hypocritical and actually label it a "thread ending post," im afraid you fall into that same category. Hypocritical.

Actually, I can end this assertion right here. A&E knew what they were getting themselves into, they knew full well what this man represented. If they were indeed good people, GT, the would have left the man alone. They put him on a show thinking the whole of America would laugh and ridicule him and his family for their views and ways, what they got was the exact opposite. They got the viewers they wanted, just not the support for their views they were hoping for.

Good people don't let their star attractions get baited into interviews and then suspend them with full knowledge of what the person represented. A&E took a bunch of calculated risks that backfired. That right there is inconsistent. Its manipulative, and even I won't stand for it.

 

[G.T.]

There are holes in her logic, tommy. Such as "good people should push back on such bad acts & make the culturally unacceptable."

Know why? Because some people feel that the "good people" would not employ a person as a face of their company who views people as deviants in society simply because of their sexuality.

So theyre doing, in effect, what fox is saying "good people" should do, except each has a different definition of what is "bad."

If you dont find that to be inconsistent/hypocritical and actually label it a "thread ending post," im afraid you fall into that same category. Hypocritical.

There are NO HOLES in logic where LIBERTY of the individual is concerned.

YOU are dismissed.

wow @ how simple you must be to have responded to THAT, with THIS.

 

[G.T.]

I say this politely templar - have you reviewed his contract in order to make this assertion? Cuz if not, your post is NECESSARILY hyperbole.

 

[The T]

LOL. I wish. There are a lot of good people who have posted on this thread who really are stuggling with that concept though.

Some have not distinguished between what GLAAD did to Phil Robertson and a valid, legitimate boycott. Some still think what GLAAD did was okay. I don't think it was okay. I don't see it at all as the same thing as a legitimate boycott. I see what GLAAD did to Phil Robertson; what the American Family Association did to Ellen DeGeneres, and anybody who does that sort of thing as being destructively intolerant, hateful, vindictive, and committing a very bad act.

I think good people have to push back on such bad acts and make them culturally unacceptable. Express our opinions of course. Put our money where our mouth is, of course. We don't have to like what others say. We don't even have to be quiet about what we think about what others say. But we have to allow them to be who and what they are without fear that some mob, group, or organization will try to physically and/or materially harm them.

Yeah, I have no illusions, Foxy. You and I have been through this thread since day ONE, and YOU having to put up with it AS the OP...but as far as I am concerned? YOUR statement ties the ribbons on it. I'll be passive now. Consider this a WIN for you my dear.

HAPPY New Year.

Thanks. Usually they just go away if nobody responds to them at all. So I hope everybody who is interested in the topic--those who agree with me and those who don't--will put them on ignore for just one day. Otherwise it is too tempting to take the derail bait they dangle out there.

And no need to be passive. I sure haven't been passive. I slip now and then but I usually try not to feed the trolls, argue with idiots, or engage in other exercises of futility.

I don't believe it is futile to deal head on with the issue of tolerance as it applies to our liberties. And I also believe that my opinions aren't worth having if they can't stand up to reasoned different opinions from the rest of you. So if ya'll think I'm all wet, bring it on. Just stay on topic.

Fair enough. There are many of us that understand your point and know you're correct. Die hards I suppose.

Carry on smartly.

~REGARDS.

 

[Plasmaball]

There are holes in her logic, tommy. Such as "good people should push back on such bad acts & make the culturally unacceptable."

Know why? Because some people feel that the "good people" would not employ a person as a face of their company who views people as deviants in society simply because of their sexuality.

So theyre doing, in effect, what fox is saying "good people" should do, except each has a different definition of what is "bad."

If you dont find that to be inconsistent/hypocritical and actually label it a "thread ending post," im afraid you fall into that same category. Hypocritical.

There are NO HOLES in logic where LIBERTY of the individual is concerned.

YOU are dismissed.

the irony is thick.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This thread should have been ended before it started. It agitates me that someone could think of such a stupid fucking question - its sad that so many have argued it. Its a silly fucking question is the answer.

Am i a bully if i go around kicking bullies in the nuts? Well yea, i suppose if youre being an uber technical fucking ninny nit picker i am. But to most people - theres levels to life that are unspoken, so on a dork assed "technicality" one would BE a bully in this scenario, but most individuals with something between their ears can discern between the two - and "bullying" is unacceptable whereas "bullying bullies," to most, is called JUSTICE.

the thdead question is piddy paddying over minutia, and its annoying to the point where i was compelled to post that so many mother fuckers out that lack that common sense thinga majig.

Um... yeah, and you made her point, like so many trolls here have. You're intolerant of her intolerance. You're bent on attacking the poster. Hypocritical in asking for tolerance yet giving none. If someone bullied a child in school, you'd want that bully punished, yes? Now, lets say the kid fought back. Would he be the bully? Why? Why would you be a bully if you are merely defending yourself? Same concept here.

 

[The T]

I say this politely templar - have you reviewed his contract in order to make this assertion? Cuz if not, your post is NECESSARILY hyperbole.

HAVE YOU reviewed it? Seems to me it doesn't matter because A&E relented and he's re-instated...Ain't it a PEACH?

 

[G.T.]

I can only.laugh at that. Sorry. Wow.

 

[Foxfyre]

When you think about it, maybe we are seeing a push back. When is the last time you saw one of these big guns back down when they fired somebody over a flap like this? But A&E blinked under the pressure of millions of viewers who love Duck Dynasty and the Robertson family and expressed their support for them.

That is rather encouraging. Maybe the pendulum is swinging back to something more normal than the politics of personal destruction that we've been subjected to for the last 20 years?

 

[TemplarKormac]

I say this politely templar - have you reviewed his contract in order to make this assertion? Cuz if not, your post is NECESSARILY hyperbole.

The terms of his contract no longer matter at this point now do they? Given that A&E reinstated him, they have completed that vicious circle of embarrassing themselves. The contract no longer matters. It took the ire and wrath of the viewership to recognize the error of their ways. You're here to troll, not address anything the OP discussed.

 

[The T]

When you think about it, maybe we are seeing a push back. When is the last time you saw one of these big guns back down when they fired somebody over a flap like this? But A&E blinked under the pressure of millions of viewers who love Duck Dynasty and the Robertson family and expressed their support for them.

That is rather encouraging. Maybe the pendulum is swinging back to something more normal than the politics of personal destruction that we've been subjected to for the last 20 years?

As a matter of course? It is. The people are awake and aren't taking the PC crap any longer...A&E are the FIRST to feel the wrath...FAR too many more to go.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I can only.laugh at that. Sorry. Wow.

You have nothing left. You are defeated. I laugh at such a feeble rebuttal. Run along now.

 

[The T]

I say this politely templar - have you reviewed his contract in order to make this assertion? Cuz if not, your post is NECESSARILY hyperbole.

The terms of his contract no longer matter at this point now do they? Given the A&E reinstated him, they have completed that vicious circle of embarrassing themselves. The contract no longer matters. It took the ire and wrath of the viewership to recognize the error of your ways. You're here to troll, not address anything the OP discussed.

^Precisely. Good Form TK.

 

[Plasmaball]

This thread should have been ended before it started. It agitates me that someone could think of such a stupid fucking question - its sad that so many have argued it. Its a silly fucking question is the answer.

Am i a bully if i go around kicking bullies in the nuts? Well yea, i suppose if youre being an uber technical fucking ninny nit picker i am. But to most people - theres levels to life that are unspoken, so on a dork assed "technicality" one would BE a bully in this scenario, but most individuals with something between their ears can discern between the two - and "bullying" is unacceptable whereas "bullying bullies," to most, is called JUSTICE.

the thdead question is piddy paddying over minutia, and its annoying to the point where i was compelled to post that so many mother fuckers out that lack that common sense thinga majig.

Um... yeah, and you made her point, like so many trolls here have. You're intolerant of her intolerance. You're bent on attacking the poster. Hypocritical in asking for tolerance yet giving none. If someone bullied a child in school, you'd want that bully punished, yes? Now, lets say the kid fought back. Would he be the bully? Why? Why would you be a bully if you are merely defending yourself? Same concept here.

and she is intolerant of glaads intolerance......which has been pointed out as well and ignored because its shows just how fucking stupid the OP is and the Poster is.
she is ignoring posts because she is wrong.

 

[G.T.]

Templars and tommys posts were addressed inside of the posts of mine which they quoted, which only says that they dont do nuance.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I say this politely templar - have you reviewed his contract in order to make this assertion? Cuz if not, your post is NECESSARILY hyperbole.

The terms of his contract no longer matter at this point now do they? Given the A&E reinstated him, they have completed that vicious circle of embarrassing themselves. The contract no longer matters. It took the ire and wrath of the viewership to recognize the error of your ways. You're here to troll, not address anything the OP discussed.

^Precisely. Good Form TK.

Don't choke on that.

 

[Plasmaball]

I say this politely templar - have you reviewed his contract in order to make this assertion? Cuz if not, your post is NECESSARILY hyperbole.

The terms of his contract no longer matter at this point now do they? Given the A&E reinstated him, they have completed that vicious circle of embarrassing themselves. The contract no longer matters. It took the ire and wrath of the viewership to recognize the error of their ways. You're here to troll, not address anything the OP discussed.

what if this was all an act for ratings? The whole argument for both sides fail.

 

[The T]

This thread should have been ended before it started. It agitates me that someone could think of such a stupid fucking question - its sad that so many have argued it. Its a silly fucking question is the answer.

Am i a bully if i go around kicking bullies in the nuts? Well yea, i suppose if youre being an uber technical fucking ninny nit picker i am. But to most people - theres levels to life that are unspoken, so on a dork assed "technicality" one would BE a bully in this scenario, but most individuals with something between their ears can discern between the two - and "bullying" is unacceptable whereas "bullying bullies," to most, is called JUSTICE.

the thdead question is piddy paddying over minutia, and its annoying to the point where i was compelled to post that so many mother fuckers out that lack that common sense thinga majig.

Um... yeah, and you made her point, like so many trolls here have. You're intolerant of her intolerance. You're bent on attacking the poster. Hypocritical in asking for tolerance yet giving none. If someone bullied a child in school, you'd want that bully punished, yes? Now, lets say the kid fought back. Would he be the bully? Why? Why would you be a bully if you are merely defending yourself? Same concept here.

and she is intolerant of glaads intolerance......which has been pointed out as well and ignored because its shows just how fucking stupid the OP is and the Poster is.
she is ignoring posts because she is wrong.

YOU lost. Go back to sleep.

 

[G.T.]

I say this politely templar - have you reviewed his contract in order to make this assertion? Cuz if not, your post is NECESSARILY hyperbole.

The terms of his contract no longer matter at this point now do they? Given the A&E reinstated him, they have completed that vicious circle of embarrassing themselves. The contract no longer matters. It took the ire and wrath of the viewership to recognize the error of their ways. You're here to troll, not address anything the OP discussed.

The terms of the contract matter to the point you asserted, we wont wait for ya to speak honestly on that little nuance though slogans work better than intellect with the intellectual level of cheerleader you carry.