Tolerance: Allowing people to be who and what they are.

[Derideo_Te]

When DOMA was overturned the SCOTUS de facto made it illegal to discriminate against gays at the Federal level. It is only a matter of time before it will be enforced at the state level given the rate at which gay marriage is being enacted nationwide.

So you are on the losing side if you expect that will hold up in court.

If it was a Constitution matter you wouldn't be saying "in a matter of time". Which has nothing to do with the defense of marriage act anyway.

The SCOTUS is the final arbiter of what is constitutional. They chickened out of overturning the entire act thereby leaving a loophole for the states to come up to speed by overturning their own discriminatory legislation. You would have been screeching about judicial activism if they had done so. You also appear to lack an understanding of how the process works in practice.

 

[Asclepias]

In my opinion, yes, because I want to know what other people thinking whether I agree with it or not. Frankly, I want to know who the REAL racists are so that I know not to associate with them. But that's just me, I know, many (most) would disagree.

Frankly, you will know who the real racists are because they will sooner or later make a comment that will identify them as such. And his comment about calling them racists isn't going to change their stance, anyway.


The same question can be applied to you. What do you accomplish by making the comment that you "hate blacks"? Do you think that by stating that you hate blacks that everyone is going to agree that we need to ship them somewhere else, because you hate them? Who gives a crap, anyway, that you do? You want the freedom to make a nasty remark about someone but don't want them to have the freedom to call you a name back.

Sincere question, I'd like to know.

There you have it.

That, of course, doesn't answer my question at all (you went directly and transparently into deflect mode, I'm used to that), so I'll try again.

Let's say (using your nasty example) that you say that you hate blacks. You even have a big ol' butt tattoo that says that you hate blacks.

I scream "racist!" and try to get you fired. I immediately "feel" good about myself, because I've "done something", and that's all I care about.

As for you, has this experience decreased your hatred of blacks in any way? Have I helped to change your mind, heal wounds, build bridges?

Since I don't get straight answers here (yours was just another vivid example), I'll help: No, you still hate blacks, probably even more, sadly.


.

Thats not true. If that was true there is no need to place people in prison or put them to death. We would just apply your prefered method of correction. Some people are going to hate others regardless no matter how nice you are to them. You cannot convince someone not to be racist. They have to do that on their own. If they are too dense and or stubborn to see how crippling racism is right in this moment then you are not going to change their hearts. Thats something they have to understand themselves by looking at all the evidence to the contrary all around them and accepting that they are flat out wrong.

 

[Mac1958]

Frankly, you will know who the real racists are because they will sooner or later make a comment that will identify them as such. And his comment about calling them racists isn't going to change their stance, anyway.


The same question can be applied to you. What do you accomplish by making the comment that you "hate blacks"? Do you think that by stating that you hate blacks that everyone is going to agree that we need to ship them somewhere else, because you hate them? Who gives a crap, anyway, that you do? You want the freedom to make a nasty remark about someone but don't want them to have the freedom to call you a name back.

There you have it.

That, of course, doesn't answer my question at all (you went directly and transparently into deflect mode, I'm used to that), so I'll try again.

Let's say (using your nasty example) that you say that you hate blacks. You even have a big ol' butt tattoo that says that you hate blacks.

I scream "racist!" and try to get you fired. I immediately "feel" good about myself, because I've "done something", and that's all I care about.

As for you, has this experience decreased your hatred of blacks in any way? Have I helped to change your mind, heal wounds, build bridges?

Since I don't get straight answers here (yours was just another vivid example), I'll help: No, you still hate blacks, probably even more, sadly.


.

Thats not true. If that was true there is no need to place people in prison or put them to death. We would just apply your prefered method of correction. Some people are going to hate others regardless no matter how nice you are to them. You cannot convince someone not to be racist. They have to do that on their own. If they are too dense and or stubborn to see how crippling racism is right in this moment then you are not going to change their hearts. Thats something they have to understand themselves by looking at all the evidence to the contrary all around them and accepting that they are flat out wrong.

The continued presence of racism cannot be denied and cannot be avoided. Here's the difference between you and I -- I have more faith in people than you do. I think that people can grow and improve. I have no need to punish people with whom I disagree, unless they break the law. I think we all have potential. One of the issues on which I regularly disagree with the Left.

.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In my opinion, yes, because I want to know what other people thinking whether I agree with it or not. Frankly, I want to know who the REAL racists are so that I know not to associate with them. But that's just me, I know, many (most) would disagree.

Frankly, you will know who the real racists are because they will sooner or later make a comment that will identify them as such. And his comment about calling them racists isn't going to change their stance, anyway.


The same question can be applied to you. What do you accomplish by making the comment that you "hate blacks"? Do you think that by stating that you hate blacks that everyone is going to agree that we need to ship them somewhere else, because you hate them? Who gives a crap, anyway, that you do? You want the freedom to make a nasty remark about someone but don't want them to have the freedom to call you a name back.

Sincere question, I'd like to know.

There you have it.

That, of course, doesn't answer my question at all (you went directly and transparently into deflect mode, I'm used to that), so I'll try again.

Let's say (using your nasty example) that you say that you hate blacks. You even have a big ol' butt tattoo that says that you hate blacks.

I scream "racist!" and try to get you fired. I immediately "feel" good about myself, because I've "done something", and that's all I care about.

As for you, has this experience decreased your hatred of blacks in any way? Have I helped to change your mind, heal wounds, build bridges?

Since I don't get straight answers here (yours was just another vivid example), I'll help: No, you still hate blacks, probably even more, sadly.


.

You are getting straight answers, that you don’t like the answers isn’t the respondents’ fault.

Seeking to compel people to not scream "racist!" and attempting to get the racist fired isn’t going to decrease someone’s hatred of blacks in any way, either; no minds will be changed, no wounds healed, no bridges built.

Your campaign for civility might help decrease the more extreme and excessive examples of opposition to racism and hate, but it’s naïve to believe such examples will be eliminated altogether.

My position is that I disagree with both sides on the issue: screaming "racist!" and attempting to get the racist fired is a completely pointless exercise; likewise, adhering to the myth of ‘political correctness’ and accusing those opposed to expressions of hate and ignorance of being ‘intolerant,’ ‘enemies of free expression,’ or not allowing people to ‘be who they are’ is just as pointless and inane.

You’re just going to have to accept the fact that in a free and democratic society there will always be those who will feel the need to speak out against those who express hate and ignorance, including advocating that the livelihood of the racist be jeopardized, as they are at liberty to do, however wrong or inappropriate you might perceive that to be.

 

[Foxfyre]

Speaking out against practices, statements, opinions etc. we think are wrong, hurtful, immoral, destructive is one thing. Activism against people who are intentionally and with purpose actively hurting people is one thing. Activism against harmful practices that are inadvertently hurting people, but the group or entity will not cease doing such practices, is one thing. Making a personal choice not to associate with or patronize people we find offensive is one thing.

But actively trying to hurt people physically and/or materially for nothing more than expressing an opinion that we don't like or for using a word that isn't allowed in the current politically correct dictionary or for presenting a theory or philosophy that we don't share is something quite different. It is morally and ethically wrong. It is evil. And it does threaten the American culture as we know it. Freedom loving people should not tolerate that from anybody regardless of their race, ethnicity, sociopolitical standing, political leanings, gender, or sexual orientation.

 

[hunarcy]

But actively trying to hurt people physically and/or materially for nothing more than expressing an opinion that we don't like or for using a word that isn't allowed in the current politically correct dictionary or for presenting a theory or philosophy that we don't share is something quite different. It is morally and ethically wrong. It is evil. And it does threaten the American culture as we know it. Freedom loving people should not tolerate that from anybody regardless of their race, ethnicity, sociopolitical standing, political leanings, gender, or sexual orientation.

It amazes me that some do everything that they can to not see that is your point and will throw up any irrelevancy to distract from it.

 

[Foxfyre]

But actively trying to hurt people physically and/or materially for nothing more than expressing an opinion that we don't like or for using a word that isn't allowed in the current politically correct dictionary or for presenting a theory or philosophy that we don't share is something quite different. It is morally and ethically wrong. It is evil. And it does threaten the American culture as we know it. Freedom loving people should not tolerate that from anybody regardless of their race, ethnicity, sociopolitical standing, political leanings, gender, or sexual orientation.

It amazes me that some do everything that they can to not see that is your point and will throw up any irrelevancy to distract from it.

Yes. Some so want to see people punished who are different or think differently than they do, they refuse to even acknowledge, much less discuss the difference between telling somebody off and punching somebody out.

But again it comes down to who is fair game to be physically and/or materially punished, hurt, disciplined, destroyed? Who gets to decide that THIS group should be allowed the blessings of free speech and expression of whatever they think or feel or believe, and THAT group should not be allowed the blessings of free speech and expression of whatever they think or feel or believe?

Will those on the left allow somebody like me to make up a list of who it is okay to critiize, describe with a bad word, slur, ridicule, or otherwise characterize unkindly?

Will those on the right allow somebody like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or any of our leftist friends here make up such a list they are expected to adhere to?

Is it possible for everybody still capable of critical thought to consider that if a Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or spokespersons for GLAAD or Moveon.Org or the Dixie Chicks or Rosie O'Donnell or Michael Moore or MSNBC or anybody of like mind should be allowed the blessings of being who they are and saying what they think? And if we allow those people to be who they are and express what they think, then also a Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter or Sean Hannity or Phil Robertson should be allowed the blessings of being who they are and saying what they think.

To physically and/or materially attack somebody for no other reason than you don't like them or they say something you don't consider politically correct is wrong, hateful, and evil. You can believe that and still have full license to rebut anything they say and condemn what they say to your heart's content. You can tell them off. That's okay. But it should not be okay to punch them out.

 

[Asclepias]

[/B]

That, of course, doesn't answer my question at all (you went directly and transparently into deflect mode, I'm used to that), so I'll try again.

Let's say (using your nasty example) that you say that you hate blacks. You even have a big ol' butt tattoo that says that you hate blacks.

I scream "racist!" and try to get you fired. I immediately "feel" good about myself, because I've "done something", and that's all I care about.

As for you, has this experience decreased your hatred of blacks in any way? Have I helped to change your mind, heal wounds, build bridges?

Since I don't get straight answers here (yours was just another vivid example), I'll help: No, you still hate blacks, probably even more, sadly.


.

Thats not true. If that was true there is no need to place people in prison or put them to death. We would just apply your prefered method of correction. Some people are going to hate others regardless no matter how nice you are to them. You cannot convince someone not to be racist. They have to do that on their own. If they are too dense and or stubborn to see how crippling racism is right in this moment then you are not going to change their hearts. Thats something they have to understand themselves by looking at all the evidence to the contrary all around them and accepting that they are flat out wrong.

The continued presence of racism cannot be denied and cannot be avoided. Here's the difference between you and I -- I have more faith in people than you do. I think that people can grow and improve. I have no need to punish people with whom I disagree, unless they break the law. I think we all have potential. One of the issues on which I regularly disagree with the Left.

.

I guess you would be wrong then. I have faith in people and I know people have potential but at the same time I am not in la la land about it. Legality is not the issue here as the OP has stated. I don't have time to wait for a rapist, or racist to figure out they are wrong. They can do that after being punished by whatever methods are available. Since you disagree with the left I'd have to assume you are on the right? If so that simply tells me you have just as much of a narcissistic attitude as anyone on the left.

 

[Asclepias]

Speaking out against practices, statements, opinions etc. we think are wrong, hurtful, immoral, destructive is one thing. Activism against people who are intentionally and with purpose actively hurting people is one thing. Activism against harmful practices that are inadvertently hurting people, but the group or entity will not cease doing such practices, is one thing. Making a personal choice not to associate with or patronize people we find offensive is one thing.

But actively trying to hurt people physically and/or materially for nothing more than expressing an opinion that we don't like or for using a word that isn't allowed in the current politically correct dictionary or for presenting a theory or philosophy that we don't share is something quite different. It is morally and ethically wrong. It is evil. And it does threaten the American culture as we know it. Freedom loving people should not tolerate that from anybody regardless of their race, ethnicity, sociopolitical standing, political leanings, gender, or sexual orientation.

I think you are not getting the point. Expression of an intolerant idea moves to or reinforces that idea in more than 1 person. That is a despicable act IMO. For said despicable act I will meet fire with fire. Its really that simple. You can wail about how immoral or unethical it is but that is not the issue. The issue is that the person running their mouth should have exercised restraint in the first place. Place the blame where it belongs. Thats with the intolerant person.

 

[Plasmaball]

Speaking out against practices, statements, opinions etc. we think are wrong, hurtful, immoral, destructive is one thing. Activism against people who are intentionally and with purpose actively hurting people is one thing. Activism against harmful practices that are inadvertently hurting people, but the group or entity will not cease doing such practices, is one thing. Making a personal choice not to associate with or patronize people we find offensive is one thing.

But actively trying to hurt people physically and/or materially for nothing more than expressing an opinion that we don't like or for using a word that isn't allowed in the current politically correct dictionary or for presenting a theory or philosophy that we don't share is something quite different. It is morally and ethically wrong. It is evil. And it does threaten the American culture as we know it. Freedom loving people should not tolerate that from anybody regardless of their race, ethnicity, sociopolitical standing, political leanings, gender, or sexual orientation.

then counter those people with your own protests for all we care, but dont cry when you are being called intolerant as well.


Not that we havent already covered this already

 

[Plasmaball]

Will those on the right allow somebody like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or any of our leftist friends here make up such a list they are expected to adhere t

first off you dont allow anything. You dont get to make the rules. Society does.

 

[Foxfyre]

Speaking out against practices, statements, opinions etc. we think are wrong, hurtful, immoral, destructive is one thing. Activism against people who are intentionally and with purpose actively hurting people is one thing. Activism against harmful practices that are inadvertently hurting people, but the group or entity will not cease doing such practices, is one thing. Making a personal choice not to associate with or patronize people we find offensive is one thing.

But actively trying to hurt people physically and/or materially for nothing more than expressing an opinion that we don't like or for using a word that isn't allowed in the current politically correct dictionary or for presenting a theory or philosophy that we don't share is something quite different. It is morally and ethically wrong. It is evil. And it does threaten the American culture as we know it. Freedom loving people should not tolerate that from anybody regardless of their race, ethnicity, sociopolitical standing, political leanings, gender, or sexual orientation.

I think you are not getting the point. Expression of an intolerant idea moves to or reinforces that idea in more than 1 person. That is a despicable act IMO. For said despicable act I will meet fire with fire. Its really that simple. You can wail about how immoral or unethical it is but that is not the issue. The issue is that the person running their mouth should have exercised restraint in the first place. Place the blame where it belongs. Thats with the intolerant person.

But again, and this is maybe the third or fourth or more time I have asked you to answer the question, who gets to decide what is an intolerant idea or opinion?

Is the guy who promotes traditional marriage intolerant?
Is the guy who speaks against traditional marriage intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes same sex marriage intolerant of those who value the traditional definition of marriage?
Is the guy who wants civil unions but to leave the traditional definition of marriage intact intolerant?
Is the guy who speaks out against the welfare state intolerant?
Is the guy who objects to dissolving the welfare state intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks the Bible says certain things are sin intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks the Bible is a bunch of fairy tales and promotes hate intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks black people are mostly dumb as rocks intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks white people are mostly racist intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes passing out free condoms to kids intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes abstinance for kids intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes legalization of recreational drugs intolerant?
Is the guy who see legalization of recreational drugs as more dangerous than good intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks Republicans are terrible intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks Democxrats are terrible intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks women should be allowed to do anything men do intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks women should have to meet the same standards as the men do in order to do the same things men do intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks nobody should oppose free contraceptives to those who want them intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks people should buy their own contraceptives intolerant?
Is the guy who wants the traditional creche on the courthouse lawn at Christmas intolerant?
Is the guy who wants that creche removed from the courthouse lawn intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks historical religious symbols have a place on city, county, and state seals intolerant?
Is the guy who wants all religious imagery, symbolism, and expression removed from the public sector intolerant?

The list could go on and on and on and on.

Would you trust me to make up those things that society will consider tolerant and intolerant? Who will be allowed to be who and what they are?
Or do you consider yourself competent to make up a list of what society will consider tolerant and intolerant? Who and what they are?

 

[Mertex]

In my opinion, yes, because I want to know what other people thinking whether I agree with it or not. Frankly, I want to know who the REAL racists are so that I know not to associate with them. But that's just me, I know, many (most) would disagree.

Frankly, you will know who the real racists are because they will sooner or later make a comment that will identify them as such. And his comment about calling them racists isn't going to change their stance, anyway.


The same question can be applied to you. What do you accomplish by making the comment that you "hate blacks"? Do you think that by stating that you hate blacks that everyone is going to agree that we need to ship them somewhere else, because you hate them? Who gives a crap, anyway, that you do? You want the freedom to make a nasty remark about someone but don't want them to have the freedom to call you a name back.

Sincere question, I'd like to know.

There you have it.

That, of course, doesn't answer my question at all (you went directly and transparently into deflect mode, I'm used to that), so I'll try again.

No, I actually did answer your question, that you were not able to grasp it is your problem not mine.

Let's say (using your nasty example) that you say that you hate blacks. You even have a big ol' butt tattoo that says that you hate blacks.

I scream "racist!" and try to get you fired. I immediately "feel" good about myself, because I've "done something", and that's all I care about.

I seriously doubt that the boss is going to be looking at an employee's butt, so your scenario is quite a stretch. And, I seriously doubt you can get someone fired because they make a statement such as you mentioned. Racists who violate the civil rights of another person, whether black, yellow or purple, are the only ones that can be charged with discrimination based on race.

As for you, has this experience decreased your hatred of blacks in any way? Have I helped to change your mind, heal wounds, build bridges?

Since I'm not racist, I can't even imagine how a racist would feel, whether being called racist has any effect on them and whether or not they can even be compelled to change.

Are you saying that you are racist, and that being called a racist doesn't decrease your hatred for blacks in anyway? That it doesn't change your mind, heal your wounds or help you build bridges?

Since I don't get straight answers here (yours was just another vivid example), I'll help: No, you still hate blacks, probably even more, sadly.

You haven't uncovered anything that we didn't already know. Racists don't change just because someone calls them racists, and they certainly can't be forced to change, but racists that discriminate and violate the civil rights can be brought to accountability, and if they lose their job over it, well they deserved to.

In your previous post you claimed that you didn't like people calling them racists, because you want to know who the racists are.....so, based on your own premise, that they don't change just because someone calls them racist, I don't understand what your problem is.

 

[Mac1958]

I don't understand what your problem is.

None. As I said, I never expect straight answers here.

Thanks for justifying that for me. Again.

.

 

[Bfgrn]

But actively trying to hurt people physically and/or materially for nothing more than expressing an opinion that we don't like or for using a word that isn't allowed in the current politically correct dictionary or for presenting a theory or philosophy that we don't share is something quite different. It is morally and ethically wrong. It is evil. And it does threaten the American culture as we know it. Freedom loving people should not tolerate that from anybody regardless of their race, ethnicity, sociopolitical standing, political leanings, gender, or sexual orientation.

It amazes me that some do everything that they can to not see that is your point and will throw up any irrelevancy to distract from it.

Yes. Some so want to see people punished who are different or think differently than they do, they refuse to even acknowledge, much less discuss the difference between telling somebody off and punching somebody out.

But again it comes down to who is fair game to be physically and/or materially punished, hurt, disciplined, destroyed? Who gets to decide that THIS group should be allowed the blessings of free speech and expression of whatever they think or feel or believe, and THAT group should not be allowed the blessings of free speech and expression of whatever they think or feel or believe?

Will those on the left allow somebody like me to make up a list of who it is okay to critiize, describe with a bad word, slur, ridicule, or otherwise characterize unkindly?

Will those on the right allow somebody like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or any of our leftist friends here make up such a list they are expected to adhere to?

Is it possible for everybody still capable of critical thought to consider that if a Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or spokespersons for GLAAD or Moveon.Org or the Dixie Chicks or Rosie O'Donnell or Michael Moore or MSNBC or anybody of like mind should be allowed the blessings of being who they are and saying what they think? And if we allow those people to be who they are and express what they think, then also a Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter or Sean Hannity or Phil Robertson should be allowed the blessings of being who they are and saying what they think.

To physically and/or materially attack somebody for no other reason than you don't like them or they say something you don't consider politically correct is wrong, hateful, and evil. You can believe that and still have full license to rebut anything they say and condemn what they say to your heart's content. You can tell them off. That's okay. But it should not be okay to punch them out.

Yes. Some so want to see people punished who are different or think differently than they do...

Yes, Some so want to see people punished...

I think was GLAAD did was evil. It SHOULD be criminal.

Can you say BIG government?

 

[Asclepias]

Speaking out against practices, statements, opinions etc. we think are wrong, hurtful, immoral, destructive is one thing. Activism against people who are intentionally and with purpose actively hurting people is one thing. Activism against harmful practices that are inadvertently hurting people, but the group or entity will not cease doing such practices, is one thing. Making a personal choice not to associate with or patronize people we find offensive is one thing.

But actively trying to hurt people physically and/or materially for nothing more than expressing an opinion that we don't like or for using a word that isn't allowed in the current politically correct dictionary or for presenting a theory or philosophy that we don't share is something quite different. It is morally and ethically wrong. It is evil. And it does threaten the American culture as we know it. Freedom loving people should not tolerate that from anybody regardless of their race, ethnicity, sociopolitical standing, political leanings, gender, or sexual orientation.

I think you are not getting the point. Expression of an intolerant idea moves to or reinforces that idea in more than 1 person. That is a despicable act IMO. For said despicable act I will meet fire with fire. Its really that simple. You can wail about how immoral or unethical it is but that is not the issue. The issue is that the person running their mouth should have exercised restraint in the first place. Place the blame where it belongs. Thats with the intolerant person.

But again, and this is maybe the third or fourth or more time I have asked you to answer the question, who gets to decide what is an intolerant idea or opinion?

Is the guy who promotes traditional marriage intolerant?
Is the guy who speaks against traditional marriage intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes same sex marriage intolerant of those who value the traditional definition of marriage?
Is the guy who wants civil unions but to leave the traditional definition of marriage intact intolerant?
Is the guy who speaks out against the welfare state intolerant?
Is the guy who objects to dissolving the welfare state intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks the Bible says certain things are sin intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks the Bible is a bunch of fairy tales and promotes hate intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks black people are mostly dumb as rocks intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks white people are mostly racist intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes passing out free condoms to kids intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes abstinance for kids intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes legalization of recreational drugs intolerant?
Is the guy who see legalization of recreational drugs as more dangerous than good intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks Republicans are terrible intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks Democxrats are terrible intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks women should be allowed to do anything men do intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks women should have to meet the same standards as the men do in order to do the same things men do intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks nobody should oppose free contraceptives to those who want them intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks people should buy their own contraceptives intolerant?
Is the guy who wants the traditional creche on the courthouse lawn at Christmas intolerant?
Is the guy who wants that creche removed from the courthouse lawn intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks historical religious symbols have a place on city, county, and state seals intolerant?
Is the guy who wants all religious imagery, symbolism, and expression removed from the public sector intolerant?

The list could go on and on and on and on.

Would you trust me to make up those things that society will consider tolerant and intolerant? Who will be allowed to be who and what they are?
Or do you consider yourself competent to make up a list of what society will consider tolerant and intolerant? Who and what they are?

I get the feeling you are not being sincere. There is no way i am going to answer all those questions and you know it. You appear to just want to be right which is fine by me but just let me know.

Is the guy who promotes traditional marriage intolerant? Yes if he is denouncing other marriages.

Is the guy who speaks against traditional marriage intolerant? Yes. He is denouncing something that does not affect him and hurts those who want to be traditionally married.

 

[Mertex]

[/B]

That, of course, doesn't answer my question at all (you went directly and transparently into deflect mode, I'm used to that), so I'll try again.

Let's say (using your nasty example) that you say that you hate blacks. You even have a big ol' butt tattoo that says that you hate blacks.

I scream "racist!" and try to get you fired. I immediately "feel" good about myself, because I've "done something", and that's all I care about.

As for you, has this experience decreased your hatred of blacks in any way? Have I helped to change your mind, heal wounds, build bridges?

Since I don't get straight answers here (yours was just another vivid example), I'll help: No, you still hate blacks, probably even more, sadly.


.

Thats not true. If that was true there is no need to place people in prison or put them to death. We would just apply your prefered method of correction. Some people are going to hate others regardless no matter how nice you are to them. You cannot convince someone not to be racist. They have to do that on their own. If they are too dense and or stubborn to see how crippling racism is right in this moment then you are not going to change their hearts. Thats something they have to understand themselves by looking at all the evidence to the contrary all around them and accepting that they are flat out wrong.

The continued presence of racism cannot be denied and cannot be avoided.

That's true, but racism used to extend to the point where people were not allowed to sit in the same area as others, go to the same public schools, drink from the same fountains, or sit where they chose on a bus, etc. That could and has been avoided, due to the Civil Rights Act.

Here's the difference between you and I -- I have more faith in people than you do.

Since you don't know me personally, you have no idea how much faith I have or don't have in people, and whether or not it is more than yours. Your comment is inane.

I think that people can grow and improve. I have no need to punish people with whom I disagree, unless they break the law.

I do too, unfortunately, they do so at their own pace and when it comes to public facilities, we don't have time to wait until everybody changes. Everybody is entitled to the same rights under our Constitution, and to deny some their rights based on race is not only against the Constitution, it is also unChristian.

People that discriminate based on race are breaking the law, and they should be punished accordingly.

I think we all have potential. One of the issues on which I regularly disagree with the Left.

That's rich, since it is the right that believes and supports Capital Punishment....

 

[Foxfyre]

I think you are not getting the point. Expression of an intolerant idea moves to or reinforces that idea in more than 1 person. That is a despicable act IMO. For said despicable act I will meet fire with fire. Its really that simple. You can wail about how immoral or unethical it is but that is not the issue. The issue is that the person running their mouth should have exercised restraint in the first place. Place the blame where it belongs. Thats with the intolerant person.

But again, and this is maybe the third or fourth or more time I have asked you to answer the question, who gets to decide what is an intolerant idea or opinion?

Is the guy who promotes traditional marriage intolerant?
Is the guy who speaks against traditional marriage intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes same sex marriage intolerant of those who value the traditional definition of marriage?
Is the guy who wants civil unions but to leave the traditional definition of marriage intact intolerant?
Is the guy who speaks out against the welfare state intolerant?
Is the guy who objects to dissolving the welfare state intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks the Bible says certain things are sin intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks the Bible is a bunch of fairy tales and promotes hate intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks black people are mostly dumb as rocks intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks white people are mostly racist intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes passing out free condoms to kids intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes abstinance for kids intolerant?
Is the guy who promotes legalization of recreational drugs intolerant?
Is the guy who see legalization of recreational drugs as more dangerous than good intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks Republicans are terrible intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks Democxrats are terrible intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks women should be allowed to do anything men do intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks women should have to meet the same standards as the men do in order to do the same things men do intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks nobody should oppose free contraceptives to those who want them intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks people should buy their own contraceptives intolerant?
Is the guy who wants the traditional creche on the courthouse lawn at Christmas intolerant?
Is the guy who wants that creche removed from the courthouse lawn intolerant?
Is the guy who thinks historical religious symbols have a place on city, county, and state seals intolerant?
Is the guy who wants all religious imagery, symbolism, and expression removed from the public sector intolerant?

The list could go on and on and on and on.

Would you trust me to make up those things that society will consider tolerant and intolerant? Who will be allowed to be who and what they are?
Or do you consider yourself competent to make up a list of what society will consider tolerant and intolerant? Who and what they are?

I get the feeling you are not being sincere. There is no way i am going to answer all those questions and you know it. You appear to just want to be right which is fine by me but just let me know.

Is the guy who promotes traditional marriage intolerant? Yes if he is denouncing other marriages.

Is the guy who speaks against traditional marriage intolerant? Yes. He is denouncing something that does not affect him and hurts those who want to be traditionally married.

In my opinion, anybody who is unwilling to see the logic in those questions is not being sincere in this discussion. I accept that you think those who speak against traditional marriage are intolerant. But how does somebody hurt anybody purely with that opinion? How is that any different than the guy who speaks against same sex marriage? How does he hurt anybody with nothing other than expressing an opinon?

If you would disallow anybody to express an opinion that MIGHT offend or be disagreed with by somebody else, nobody would be allowed any opinions at all about much of anything.

But if you are serious in this discussion, you will be willing to answer the last two questions in my post. Who should be the authority in which opinions are okay to express and which opinions are not? Who decides which opinions are okay to physically and materially punish people who express them? You? Me? Who?

 

[Mertex]

But actively trying to hurt people physically and/or materially for nothing more than expressing an opinion that we don't like or for using a word that isn't allowed in the current politically correct dictionary or for presenting a theory or philosophy that we don't share is something quite different. It is morally and ethically wrong. It is evil. And it does threaten the American culture as we know it. Freedom loving people should not tolerate that from anybody regardless of their race, ethnicity, sociopolitical standing, political leanings, gender, or sexual orientation.

And, you have to agree that people from both parties do it....and, it probably won't come to an end just because some think it is childish and petty. There are freedom loving people on both sides of the aisles, but there's too many things they don't agree on....and certainly one of them is what is considered tolerant/intolerant. What appears intolerant to one group does not to another and vise versa.

 

[Plasmaball]

I don't understand what your problem is.

None. As I said, I never expect straight answers here.

Thanks for justifying that for me. Again.

.

you keep saying this, but everyone knows you have been.