Lesbians whining because doc refused to be baby's doctor

[Mac1958]

.

I don't know if this has been covered in this thread, but:

Should the doctor be forced to see the child?

.

Well lets see...if the doctor refused to treat the child because her parents were black...she would be sued or "forced" to see the child. If the doctor refused to treat the child because the parents were Christians, she would be sued or "forced" to see the child. Shall I go on? If it had been any other minority, the doctor would have been "forced" to see the child. Not so with those nasty queers in Michigan. No need. Let 'em bleed.

So I guess you're saying the doctor should be forced to see the child.

If I were the parents, I wouldn't want that person anywhere near my kid.

That's just me.

.

That's not the point. I know you want to argue the world where you want it to be, not where it is. Do you really want doctors to be able to refuse to treat someone? Shall we go back to segregated hospitals? Oh sure, nowadays it wouldn't be blacks and whites...maybe Muslim and everyone else? Gay and straight only hospitals?

Well, that situation would certainly coincide with Identity Politics, in which Americans are encouraged to become more divided, but that's another issue.

I do know the following: (1) I don't want a bigot who is guided by their god above science treating my kids, (2) that forcing such a person to treat my kids puts them in unacceptable danger, (3) that forcing such a person to treat my kids will only exacerbate their bigotry and make them worse.

So, what do we do.

My best guess - and that's all I have - is that a vast majority of doctors are not a bigot like this one. I like the fact that this made news. Perhaps instead of attacking and punishing the doctor, it would be an opportunity for us to go in the opposite direction and have some calm, rational, respectful public conversation on this issue. Perhaps if, instead of attacking and screaming at the doctor, we could find some areas of agreement and soften her stance or change her mind.

But, full disclosure, I admit that won't happen. Too many narcissists running around on both sides at this point for that. Calm, rational, respectful public conversation is now, sadly, a thing of the past.

.

It's great to be able to say "well, I just wouldn't want them treating my child". Okay, but what if they are the only game in town? The only doctor to save your child's life refuses to treat them because YOU, not the child, are "fill in the blank".

The couple were openly discriminated against, legally, and they shared that information on social media. People responded, rightfully, with anger and disgust over her actions. No government was involved, just people reacting to a disgusting human being using her faith as an excuse to discriminate.

Yes, precisely, agreed!

If the doc loses business, friends, whatever, that's the market talking, no government needed.

I pointed that out in post 144 of this thread.

.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well lets see...if the doctor refused to treat the child because her parents were black...she would be sued or "forced" to see the child. If the doctor refused to treat the child because the parents were Christians, she would be sued or "forced" to see the child. Shall I go on? If it had been any other minority, the doctor would have been "forced" to see the child. Not so with those nasty queers in Michigan. No need. Let 'em bleed.

So I guess you're saying the doctor should be forced to see the child.

If I were the parents, I wouldn't want that person anywhere near my kid.

That's just me.

.

That's not the point. I know you want to argue the world where you want it to be, not where it is. Do you really want doctors to be able to refuse to treat someone? Shall we go back to segregated hospitals? Oh sure, nowadays it wouldn't be blacks and whites...maybe Muslim and everyone else? Gay and straight only hospitals?

Well, that situation would certainly coincide with Identity Politics, in which Americans are encouraged to become more divided, but that's another issue.

I do know the following: (1) I don't want a bigot who is guided by their god above science treating my kids, (2) that forcing such a person to treat my kids puts them in unacceptable danger, (3) that forcing such a person to treat my kids will only exacerbate their bigotry and make them worse.

So, what do we do.

My best guess - and that's all I have - is that a vast majority of doctors are not a bigot like this one. I like the fact that this made news. Perhaps instead of attacking and punishing the doctor, it would be an opportunity for us to go in the opposite direction and have some calm, rational, respectful public conversation on this issue. Perhaps if, instead of attacking and screaming at the doctor, we could find some areas of agreement and soften her stance or change her mind.

But, full disclosure, I admit that won't happen. Too many narcissists running around on both sides at this point for that. Calm, rational, respectful public conversation is now, sadly, a thing of the past.

.

It's great to be able to say "well, I just wouldn't want them treating my child". Okay, but what if they are the only game in town? The only doctor to save your child's life refuses to treat them because YOU, not the child, are "fill in the blank".

The couple were openly discriminated against, legally, and they shared that information on social media. People responded, rightfully, with anger and disgust over her actions. No government was involved, just people reacting to a disgusting human being using her faith as an excuse to discriminate.

Yes, precisely, agreed!

If the doc loses business, friends, whatever, that's the market talking, no government needed.

I pointed that out in post 144 of this thread.

.

That's stupid.

 

[Seawytch]

Well lets see...if the doctor refused to treat the child because her parents were black...she would be sued or "forced" to see the child. If the doctor refused to treat the child because the parents were Christians, she would be sued or "forced" to see the child. Shall I go on? If it had been any other minority, the doctor would have been "forced" to see the child. Not so with those nasty queers in Michigan. No need. Let 'em bleed.

So I guess you're saying the doctor should be forced to see the child.

If I were the parents, I wouldn't want that person anywhere near my kid.

That's just me.

.

That's not the point. I know you want to argue the world where you want it to be, not where it is. Do you really want doctors to be able to refuse to treat someone? Shall we go back to segregated hospitals? Oh sure, nowadays it wouldn't be blacks and whites...maybe Muslim and everyone else? Gay and straight only hospitals?

Well, that situation would certainly coincide with Identity Politics, in which Americans are encouraged to become more divided, but that's another issue.

I do know the following: (1) I don't want a bigot who is guided by their god above science treating my kids, (2) that forcing such a person to treat my kids puts them in unacceptable danger, (3) that forcing such a person to treat my kids will only exacerbate their bigotry and make them worse.

So, what do we do.

My best guess - and that's all I have - is that a vast majority of doctors are not a bigot like this one. I like the fact that this made news. Perhaps instead of attacking and punishing the doctor, it would be an opportunity for us to go in the opposite direction and have some calm, rational, respectful public conversation on this issue. Perhaps if, instead of attacking and screaming at the doctor, we could find some areas of agreement and soften her stance or change her mind.

But, full disclosure, I admit that won't happen. Too many narcissists running around on both sides at this point for that. Calm, rational, respectful public conversation is now, sadly, a thing of the past.

.

It's great to be able to say "well, I just wouldn't want them treating my child". Okay, but what if they are the only game in town? The only doctor to save your child's life refuses to treat them because YOU, not the child, are "fill in the blank".

The couple were openly discriminated against, legally, and they shared that information on social media. People responded, rightfully, with anger and disgust over her actions. No government was involved, just people reacting to a disgusting human being using her faith as an excuse to discriminate.

Yes, precisely, agreed!

If the doc loses business, friends, whatever, that's the market talking, no government needed.

I pointed that out in post 144 of this thread.

.

Except we aren't agreed. You think it's great there are no legal protections for gays like there are for race, religion, gender, etc. I disagree. Yes, this couple was able to see another doctor...but what about the next couple? Will it take someone dying due to a refusal of service by a fucking doctor? We aren't talking about food or fuel being refused the rural Muslims or gays (we're at the top of the hate list) but actual life saving care?

 

[Mac1958]

So I guess you're saying the doctor should be forced to see the child.

If I were the parents, I wouldn't want that person anywhere near my kid.

That's just me.

.

That's not the point. I know you want to argue the world where you want it to be, not where it is. Do you really want doctors to be able to refuse to treat someone? Shall we go back to segregated hospitals? Oh sure, nowadays it wouldn't be blacks and whites...maybe Muslim and everyone else? Gay and straight only hospitals?

Well, that situation would certainly coincide with Identity Politics, in which Americans are encouraged to become more divided, but that's another issue.

I do know the following: (1) I don't want a bigot who is guided by their god above science treating my kids, (2) that forcing such a person to treat my kids puts them in unacceptable danger, (3) that forcing such a person to treat my kids will only exacerbate their bigotry and make them worse.

So, what do we do.

My best guess - and that's all I have - is that a vast majority of doctors are not a bigot like this one. I like the fact that this made news. Perhaps instead of attacking and punishing the doctor, it would be an opportunity for us to go in the opposite direction and have some calm, rational, respectful public conversation on this issue. Perhaps if, instead of attacking and screaming at the doctor, we could find some areas of agreement and soften her stance or change her mind.

But, full disclosure, I admit that won't happen. Too many narcissists running around on both sides at this point for that. Calm, rational, respectful public conversation is now, sadly, a thing of the past.

.

It's great to be able to say "well, I just wouldn't want them treating my child". Okay, but what if they are the only game in town? The only doctor to save your child's life refuses to treat them because YOU, not the child, are "fill in the blank".

The couple were openly discriminated against, legally, and they shared that information on social media. People responded, rightfully, with anger and disgust over her actions. No government was involved, just people reacting to a disgusting human being using her faith as an excuse to discriminate.

Yes, precisely, agreed!

If the doc loses business, friends, whatever, that's the market talking, no government needed.

I pointed that out in post 144 of this thread.

.

Except we aren't agreed. You think it's great there are no legal protections for gays like there are for race, religion, gender, etc. I disagree. Yes, this couple was able to see another doctor...but what about the next couple? Will it take someone dying due to a refusal of service by a fucking doctor? We aren't talking about food or fuel being refused the rural Muslims or gays (we're at the top of the hate list) but actual life saving care?

Then what is your solution?

.

 

[Mertex]

Unless you're a lefty.

They don't recognize the two (condemnation and hatred) are not the same, because they literally hate people who don't think like them.

Condemning someone for the sole reason they don't believe what you believe is self-righteous hatred.

So imagine how cupcake bakers feel.

Cupcake bakers? How do they feel? Is there a lot of anti cupcake bigotry going on? What do cupcakes have to do with refusing to treat a child because you're bigoted against the parents?

Don't expect idiot bigoted people to be able to tell the difference between real people and cupcakes.....

 

[bodecea]

Same-Sex Couple Blames Discrimination After Pediatrician Allegedly Refuses to See Their Newborn - Yahoo

STOP FUCKING CRYING OVER SHIT!

The kid got seen by doctor at SAME DOCTOR OFFICE! Not a problem,no reason to cry and throw a fit...jesus christ!

Thank you for continuing to advertise this Doctor and what she did....let the market decide.

 

[Mertex]

.

I don't know if this has been covered in this thread, but:

Should the doctor be forced to see the child?

.

Well lets see...if the doctor refused to treat the child because her parents were black...she would be sued or "forced" to see the child. If the doctor refused to treat the child because the parents were Christians, she would be sued or "forced" to see the child. Shall I go on? If it had been any other minority, the doctor would have been "forced" to see the child. Not so with those nasty queers in Michigan. No need. Let 'em bleed.

So I guess you're saying the doctor should be forced to see the child.

If I were the parents, I wouldn't want that person anywhere near my kid.

That's just me.

.

That's not the point. I know you want to argue the world where you want it to be, not where it is. Do you really want doctors to be able to refuse to treat someone? Shall we go back to segregated hospitals? Oh sure, nowadays it wouldn't be blacks and whites...maybe Muslim and everyone else? Gay and straight only hospitals?

Well, that situation would certainly coincide with Identity Politics, in which Americans are encouraged to become more divided, but that's another issue.

I do know the following: (1) I don't want a bigot who is guided by their god above science treating my kids, (2) that forcing such a person to treat my kids puts them in unacceptable danger, (3) that forcing such a person to treat my kids will only exacerbate their bigotry and make them worse.

So, what do we do.

My best guess - and that's all I have - is that a vast majority of doctors are not a bigot like this one. I like the fact that this made news. Perhaps instead of attacking and punishing the doctor, it would be an opportunity for us to go in the opposite direction and have some calm, rational, respectful public conversation on this issue. Perhaps if, instead of attacking and screaming at the doctor, we could find some areas of agreement and soften her stance or change her mind.

But, full disclosure, I admit that won't happen. Too many narcissists running around on both sides at this point for that. Calm, rational, respectful public conversation is now, sadly, a thing of the past.

.

It's great to be able to say "well, I just wouldn't want them treating my child". Okay, but what if they are the only game in town? The only doctor to save your child's life refuses to treat them because YOU, not the child, are "fill in the blank".

The couple were openly discriminated against, legally, and they shared that information on social media. People responded, rightfully, with anger and disgust over her actions. No government was involved, just people reacting to a disgusting human being using her faith as an excuse to discriminate.

An idiot doctor like that, that refuses to see a child because he doesn't like or understand the parent's relationship shouldn't even be practicing medicine. I would probably move to another place if he was the only doctor in town before trusting my child in his hands. I wouldn't use him even if I wasn't one of the parents he is discriminating against.

 

[Mac1958]

Well lets see...if the doctor refused to treat the child because her parents were black...she would be sued or "forced" to see the child. If the doctor refused to treat the child because the parents were Christians, she would be sued or "forced" to see the child. Shall I go on? If it had been any other minority, the doctor would have been "forced" to see the child. Not so with those nasty queers in Michigan. No need. Let 'em bleed.

So I guess you're saying the doctor should be forced to see the child.

If I were the parents, I wouldn't want that person anywhere near my kid.

That's just me.

.

That's not the point. I know you want to argue the world where you want it to be, not where it is. Do you really want doctors to be able to refuse to treat someone? Shall we go back to segregated hospitals? Oh sure, nowadays it wouldn't be blacks and whites...maybe Muslim and everyone else? Gay and straight only hospitals?

Well, that situation would certainly coincide with Identity Politics, in which Americans are encouraged to become more divided, but that's another issue.

I do know the following: (1) I don't want a bigot who is guided by their god above science treating my kids, (2) that forcing such a person to treat my kids puts them in unacceptable danger, (3) that forcing such a person to treat my kids will only exacerbate their bigotry and make them worse.

So, what do we do.

My best guess - and that's all I have - is that a vast majority of doctors are not a bigot like this one. I like the fact that this made news. Perhaps instead of attacking and punishing the doctor, it would be an opportunity for us to go in the opposite direction and have some calm, rational, respectful public conversation on this issue. Perhaps if, instead of attacking and screaming at the doctor, we could find some areas of agreement and soften her stance or change her mind.

But, full disclosure, I admit that won't happen. Too many narcissists running around on both sides at this point for that. Calm, rational, respectful public conversation is now, sadly, a thing of the past.

.

It's great to be able to say "well, I just wouldn't want them treating my child". Okay, but what if they are the only game in town? The only doctor to save your child's life refuses to treat them because YOU, not the child, are "fill in the blank".

The couple were openly discriminated against, legally, and they shared that information on social media. People responded, rightfully, with anger and disgust over her actions. No government was involved, just people reacting to a disgusting human being using her faith as an excuse to discriminate.

An idiot doctor like that, that refuses to see a child because he doesn't like or understand the parent's relationship shouldn't even be practicing medicine. I would probably move to another place if he was the only doctor in town before trusting my child in his hands. I wouldn't use him even if I wasn't one of the parents he is discriminating against.

Same here.

The first question that popped to mind when I saw this story was the AMA. I would have assumed that there is some kind of rule somewhere that says a doctor can't do this, some oath or agreement the doctor had made. Refusing to treat based on parents? I dunno.

.

 

[Gadawg73]

Why should any doctors have to treat anyone, especially Negroes? They have their own doctors, separate but equal. Don't you folks read your Bible? Shame on you.

 

[Seawytch]

That's not the point. I know you want to argue the world where you want it to be, not where it is. Do you really want doctors to be able to refuse to treat someone? Shall we go back to segregated hospitals? Oh sure, nowadays it wouldn't be blacks and whites...maybe Muslim and everyone else? Gay and straight only hospitals?

Well, that situation would certainly coincide with Identity Politics, in which Americans are encouraged to become more divided, but that's another issue.

I do know the following: (1) I don't want a bigot who is guided by their god above science treating my kids, (2) that forcing such a person to treat my kids puts them in unacceptable danger, (3) that forcing such a person to treat my kids will only exacerbate their bigotry and make them worse.

So, what do we do.

My best guess - and that's all I have - is that a vast majority of doctors are not a bigot like this one. I like the fact that this made news. Perhaps instead of attacking and punishing the doctor, it would be an opportunity for us to go in the opposite direction and have some calm, rational, respectful public conversation on this issue. Perhaps if, instead of attacking and screaming at the doctor, we could find some areas of agreement and soften her stance or change her mind.

But, full disclosure, I admit that won't happen. Too many narcissists running around on both sides at this point for that. Calm, rational, respectful public conversation is now, sadly, a thing of the past.

.

It's great to be able to say "well, I just wouldn't want them treating my child". Okay, but what if they are the only game in town? The only doctor to save your child's life refuses to treat them because YOU, not the child, are "fill in the blank".

The couple were openly discriminated against, legally, and they shared that information on social media. People responded, rightfully, with anger and disgust over her actions. No government was involved, just people reacting to a disgusting human being using her faith as an excuse to discriminate.

Yes, precisely, agreed!

If the doc loses business, friends, whatever, that's the market talking, no government needed.

I pointed that out in post 144 of this thread.

.

Except we aren't agreed. You think it's great there are no legal protections for gays like there are for race, religion, gender, etc. I disagree. Yes, this couple was able to see another doctor...but what about the next couple? Will it take someone dying due to a refusal of service by a fucking doctor? We aren't talking about food or fuel being refused the rural Muslims or gays (we're at the top of the hate list) but actual life saving care?

Then what is your solution?

.

Add gays and lesbians to existing anti discrimination laws. Either we get rid of all of them (not gonna happen) or you protect gays like all other minorities. While Muslims and gays may be at the top of the hate list, Muslims cannot be discriminated against by law...the gays can.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

As I said earlier, SassyIrishLass's desire to have her bigotry respected by the people she wants to oppress is transparent as vodka.

A bigot thinks they should be allowed to hate, but get all indignant and self-righteous when that hate is reflected right back at them by the people they discriminate against.

So....it is possible to be bigoted toward Christians and conservatives. Thanks for confirming that.

saintmichaeldefendthem
The only thing confirmed is that you are a willful idiot.

Nice try.

I'm sorry it hurts your little feelings when the people you try to oppress won't go along with your plan.

Actually you confirmed that bigotry goes both ways, both by abstract argument and by using yourself as an example. I already knew you were a bigot, just needed others to see it too.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

You're honestly going to sit there with a straight face and tell me homosexuals can't be bigots? That's as insane as their claim a homosexual can't be a pedophile.

big·ot
ˈbiɡət/
noun

1. a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

SassyIrishLass
There is no class of people who are exempt from having bigots in their midst.

However, when bigots like you attempt to keep gays down, and the gays fight back, that is not bigotry on the part of the gays. You are nothing more than a modern day version of the racists in the past who got offended when blacks didn't "know their place".

Same bullshit. Different decade. And decades from now, you will be looked back on by history and by society as a whole as being in the same company as those white-sheeted intolerant assholes.

Faux analogy.

Being black was not an unclean, perverted, filthy, immoral, degenerate act and set of practices, and abomination and aberration in the eyes of Man, God and Nature.

Racists thought so.

Connections and alliances so unnatural that God and nature seem to forbid them should be prohibited by positive law and be subject to no evasion. (Virginia Supreme Court ruling, 1878)

White race-purity is the cornerstone of our civilization. Its mongrelization with non-white blood, particularly with Negro blood, would spell the downfall of our civilization. (Lothrop Stoddard, lawyer and eugenicist, 1924)

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement, there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix. (Leon Bazile, Virginia trial court judge, 1965)

Today, the heritage that these noble men passed to their posterity is under attack. White heritage is considered 'racist,' 'bigoted,' 'hateful,' among other negative connotations. ... Add the word 'Christian' with the word 'white' and the hatred for our culture and heritage gets almost maniacal. Christianity is mocked, laughed at and disregarded as something for weirdoes or extremists.(SaveYourHeritage.com)

Oh, hell, you and I do not disagree on whether or not so-called Christians tried to justify their racism utilizing their religion.

Trouble with that is, there is no record of Jesus of Nazareth nor the contributing authors of the Old Testament, teaching that one race was superior to another.

Consequently, those Jim Crow Christians had to jump through several metaphorical hoops - and not very skillfully, either - to over-reach for inadequate juicy rationalizations.

On the other hand, the contributing authors of the Old Testament condemned homosexuality as an abomination in the eyes of the Lord.

And 3,000 years of Judeo-Christian tradition and philosophy and legal standing, all serve to render Racism-and-Gay-Rights as two quite different struggles and sets of barriers.

It is understandable that the Gay Mafia would try to pitch the Gay-Rights struggle as identical to the Civil Rights struggle, in order to garner sympathy and supporters.

But the analogy breaks-down in several key areas, and turns out to be self-serving, and a falsehood perpetrated by the Gay Rights folk, in disingenuous pursuit of their goals.

You're not fooling anybody..

You bigots use the Old Testament very selectively, just like the racists do.

Same bullshit, different decade.

It's in the New Testament too.

Bigot.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

"Dr. Roi gave 7 Action News this statement:

"Much of what has been circulated in the media and publicly has been taken out of context or is untrue.
As a doctor I'm constrained by patient privacy concerns and may not further comment on this matter at this time.
I'm a born-again Christian who believes that God loves all people as do I. I wish nothing but the best for Jami, Krista and baby."

Sorry Doc, God might be okay but you are stupid **** who does nothing like love all people. Hopefully your next position will be at another medical clinic, cleaning the toilets

 

[boilermaker55]

This bothers you? The right to bring legal action?

Same-Sex Couple Blames Discrimination After Pediatrician Allegedly Refuses to See Their Newborn - Yahoo

STOP FUCKING CRYING OVER SHIT!

The kid got seen by doctor at SAME DOCTOR OFFICE! Not a problem,no reason to cry and throw a fit...jesus christ!

Lawsuit.

Wait for it....

 

[TemplarKormac]

Unless you're a lefty.

They don't recognize the two (condemnation and hatred) are not the same, because they literally hate people who don't think like them.

Condemning someone for the sole reason they don't believe what you believe is self-righteous hatred.

So imagine how cupcake bakers feel.

Cupcake bakers? How do they feel? Is there a lot of anti cupcake bigotry going on? What do cupcakes have to do with refusing to treat a child because you're bigoted against the parents?

Don't expect idiot bigoted people to be able to tell the difference between real people and cupcakes.....

Well, there are cupcakes and militant gay rights activists. Imagine if you were on the receiving end of something like that? Wouldn't you be fighting for your rights, too?

 

[g5000]

You bigots use the Old Testament very selectively, just like the racists do.

Same bullshit, different decade.

It's in the New Testament too.

Bigot.

Not by Jesus, it isn't.

And Paul condemns masturbators and homosexuals in the same breath. The bible is also clear that even thinking about sex with a woman not your wife is adultery.

So don't tell me you assholes aren't selective. I don't see you screaming from your high horses about jerking off.

If I were you, I'd be very scared. For Matthew 7:2 tells us, "For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."


Which is why in my first post in this topic, I said, "The infallible and beatified doctor picked up the first stone and threw it. At a baby."

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

An idiot doctor like that, that refuses to see a child because he doesn't like...

Uh... HATER: The Doctor... is a woman.

HAVE YOU NO COMPASSION FOR WOMEN? HAVE YOU NO SENSE OF REASON?

WHEN WILL THE LEFT'S MINDLESS WAR ON WOMEN CEASE?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It's in the New Testament too.

Bigot.

Not by Jesus, it isn't.

And Paul condemns masturbators and homosexuals in the same breath.

So if I were you, I'd be very scared. For Matthew 7:2 tells us, "For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

Jesus never mentions pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia or incest either...in fact He never mentioned murder

 

[g5000]

As I said earlier, SassyIrishLass's desire to have her bigotry respected by the people she wants to oppress is transparent as vodka.

A bigot thinks they should be allowed to hate, but get all indignant and self-righteous when that hate is reflected right back at them by the people they discriminate against.

So....it is possible to be bigoted toward Christians and conservatives. Thanks for confirming that.

saintmichaeldefendthem
The only thing confirmed is that you are a willful idiot.

Nice try.

I'm sorry it hurts your little feelings when the people you try to oppress won't go along with your plan.

Actually you confirmed that bigotry goes both ways, both by abstract argument and by using yourself as an example. I already knew you were a bigot, just needed others to see it too.

Sorry, no one but a retard is stupid enough to believe that resisting oppression is bigotry.

It does not go both ways.

 

[g5000]

The bigots are twisting in the wind now. They want to be able to oppress others and don't like it when their targets don't "know their place".

If the people you are trying to oppress refuse to accept your oppression, they are not being bigoted. They are defending their rights.

I'm sorry some of you are so profoundly retarded not to see that.