Your Selective Bigotry

a reply to: reldra

What if what you deem bigotry (it may well be who knows except for the person who initiates the action) is civil disobedience for another?

a reply to: Mugly
Yep. Exactly.

originally posted by: reldra
No. You are not "intolerant" if you won't accept bigots or bigotry-related concern trolling or apologia about what is truly tolerant and what is not when you meet hate. That ship has sailed."

I hope that the inherent hilarity of stating that being intolerant of behaviors that you do not agree with doesn't make you "intolerant", hasn't escaped the eyes of those reading the post quoted above.

Obvious logical fallacy is obvious.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

You introduced the example as an example of bigotry. Maybe if you understood situations better you wouldn't be so offended and angry all the time.

You also may be missing my point. I'm not referring to the bigotry in the case itself, I'm referring to the bigotry on ATS where one person will support the gay couple but ignore the religious couple. Both have a belief that they wish to exercise. Both are valid...both are equally valid opinions. People on ATS (for example) have said the christians (in this case) are bigots against the gay couple for refusing to make the cake. They ignore that the religious couple can't make the cake because of their beliefs. The same harm comes to the religious couple as the gay couple if they made the cake.

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: reldra

What if what you deem bigotry (it may well be who knows except for the person who initiates the action) is civil disobedience for another?

Civil disobedience geared against a protected class may be bigotry. It depends on how it is done. For example, the Westboro Baptist Church pickets the funerals of soldiers with signs that say 'God hates Fags'. That is certainly bigotry. Religious groups picket abortion clinics. If they accost the women and employees going in and out it is illegal. If they write on the sign something like 'You are evil and going to Hell' I believe it is bigotry. People picket outside of a Mosque during a prayer service. They wear t-shirts that say F Muslims and signs that say similar things. That is bigotry. Both are allowed to picket, though. So, it can be the both at the same time.

People picket outside of a Monsanto building against GMOs. GMOs are not people. That is pure civil disobediance.

You may be talking about town clerks thatt refuse to give marriage licenses to same-sex couples. That is just not doing their job and they need to be fired. That is dereliction of duty since it is a government job and also just doing a bad job. There is a case of a certain clerk, on tape, telling the people who wanted the license that she won;t give it because of Adam and Eve and the bible and such. That is both doing a bad job and bigotry, quoting the bible while on the job for the town or county and making tax payers feel bad in a government building where they came for a service they are entitled to.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Thing is, everyone on ATS that sided with the lesbian couple did so on the same grounds... which you are insisting is bigotry. I'm showing you how it's not... or should I not be doing that? They broke a law that they agreed to when they applied for their business license. That is like you claiming discrimination by ATS for deleting an off-topic post when you damn well know the TC's require you to be on topic.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: reldra

What if what you deem bigotry (it may well be who knows except for the person who initiates the action) is civil disobedience for another?

Civil disobedience geared against a protected class may be bigotry. It depends on how it is done. For example, the Westboro Baptist Church pickets the funerals of soldiers with signs that say 'God hates Fags'. That is certainly bigotry. Religious groups picket abortion clinics. If they accost the women and employees going in and out it is illegal. If they write on the sign something like 'You are evil and going to Hell' I believe it is bigotry. People picket outside of a Mosque during a prayer service. They wear t-shirts that say F Muslims and signs that say similar things. That is bigotry. Both are allowed to picket, though. So, it can be the both at the same time.

I think you are again off on this one. Carrying a sign that says "Your are evil and going to Hell" is an opinion of their system of belief as told to them. Religion...created many, many years ago. According to statements of that religion, that statement on the sign is a fact. You may disagree with the sign and the religion but they are not being intolerant...they are stating a fact of their religion and an opinion of those personally.

If I show up at the scene of a crime and hold a sign that says "You are a murder and you are going to jail", am I intolerant or voicing an opinion?

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Thing is, everyone on ATS that sided with the lesbian couple did so on the same grounds... which you are insisting is bigotry. I'm showing you how it's not... or should I not be doing that?

Again...you're not getting it. It is bigotry for one couple to say to the other couple...I am intolerant of you and your beliefs. That is by the definition. But the same statement applies to from the gay couple to the baker couple. The gay couple by arguing for the bakers to make them the cake, which is against their religious beliefs, is intolerant of them and their beliefs.

Regardless of the law...I'm not arguing law. I'm arguing that they are both in this case bigots. And anyone supporting one over the other, calling one bigot is wrong. They are both bigots.

Get it?

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos

originally posted by: reldra
No. You are not "intolerant" if you won't accept bigots or bigotry-related concern trolling or apologia about what is truly tolerant and what is not when you meet hate. That ship has sailed."

I hope that the inherent hilarity of stating that being intolerant of behaviors that you do not agree with doesn't make you "intolerant", hasn't escaped the eyes of those reading the post quoted above.

Obvious logical fallacy is obvious.

Because I do not tolerate bigotry does not make me intolerant. I would have to not tolerate for no reason at all and for random things.

Let's say you don't like swearing in your home. You do not tolerate it and you tell people who use an expletive on the spot, that you do not tolerate it. That does not make you intolerant in general.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Thing is, everyone on ATS that sided with the lesbian couple did so on the same grounds... which you are insisting is bigotry. I'm showing you how it's not... or should I not be doing that?

Again...you're not getting it. It is bigotry for one couple to say to the other couple...I am intolerant of you and your beliefs. That is by the definition. But the same statement applies to from the gay couple to the baker couple. The gay couple by arguing for the bakers to make them the cake, which is against their religious beliefs, is intolerant of them and their beliefs.

Get it?

The bakers are business people and in their state must bake the cake. The lesbian couple did not say to the bakers "You are Christians, I think that is unseemly and evil and you are going to hell for it." That would be bigotry. The lesbians did not go to the baker's home and insult the presence of a bible and a crucifix. You are not getting it.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos

originally posted by: reldra
No. You are not "intolerant" if you won't accept bigots or bigotry-related concern trolling or apologia about what is truly tolerant and what is not when you meet hate. That ship has sailed."

I hope that the inherent hilarity of stating that being intolerant of behaviors that you do not agree with doesn't make you "intolerant", hasn't escaped the eyes of those reading the post quoted above.

Obvious logical fallacy is obvious.

Because I do not tolerate bigotry does not make me intolerant. I would have to not tolerate for no reason at all and for random things.

Let's say you don't like swearing in your home. You do not tolerate it and you tell people who use an expletive on the spot, that you do not tolerate it. That does not make you intolerant in general.

Not tolerating something makes you intolerant of it. This should not be a difficult concept to grasp.

a reply to: reldra

Go back and read my edit. I'm not talking about the law.

"This is what you get when you cannot defend what you are defending. Nonsense as substance. Vapidity as intellectual rigor. In this arena, you have to rig the rules of the game so that it is actually as wrong, if not more so, to dare to call the wrongdoer (or the apologist for the wrongdoer) out. "

Defining Tolerance Via Bigot's Rights

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

You can lead a horse to water...

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
I haven't seen anyone who hates Christians here

Bullocks. I see plenty of people mocking/bullying Christians or anyone of any faith. Maybe you refuse to see it because you agree with those doing the mocking.

It is a sad and backwards time when the defenders of the oppressed are called bigots. This is a twisted concept the right wing has invented. Or maybe it's just right wing media that ahas invented it. I am not sure whom, but they are pandering to a certain segment of the population.

It's like I'm listening to an MSNBC interview of Clinton, Very pathetic that you'd pull the victim card here lol.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos

originally posted by: reldra
No. You are not "intolerant" if you won't accept bigots or bigotry-related concern trolling or apologia about what is truly tolerant and what is not when you meet hate. That ship has sailed."

I hope that the inherent hilarity of stating that being intolerant of behaviors that you do not agree with doesn't make you "intolerant", hasn't escaped the eyes of those reading the post quoted above.

Obvious logical fallacy is obvious.

Because I do not tolerate bigotry does not make me intolerant. I would have to not tolerate for no reason at all and for random things.

Let's say you don't like swearing in your home. You do not tolerate it and you tell people who use an expletive on the spot, that you do not tolerate it. That does not make you intolerant in general.

Yes...you can be a bigot of a bigot.
You can be the hater of a hater and intolerant to the intolerant.

The dictionary is an amazing thing. It gives the definition of words and is basically the law of what words mean. A bigot is defined as someone intolerant of someone else's beliefs. And in every case I cited, these were beliefs...not facts. If you are intolerant of another's beliefs which in turn is intolerant of another's beliefs...you are also a bigot.

a reply to: reldra

Feel free to cover yourself with the cloak of social heroism if it makes you feel better about your life, but the fact is you're intolerant of things, whether you choose to accept it or not.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Oh Jesus Christ.

I blame fracking chemicals.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: reldra

What if what you deem bigotry (it may well be who knows except for the person who initiates the action) is civil disobedience for another?

Civil disobedience geared against a protected class may be bigotry. It depends on how it is done. For example, the Westboro Baptist Church pickets the funerals of soldiers with signs that say 'God hates Fags'. That is certainly bigotry. Religious groups picket abortion clinics. If they accost the women and employees going in and out it is illegal. If they write on the sign something like 'You are evil and going to Hell' I believe it is bigotry. People picket outside of a Mosque during a prayer service. They wear t-shirts that say F Muslims and signs that say similar things. That is bigotry. Both are allowed to picket, though. So, it can be the both at the same time.

I think you are again off on this one. Carrying a sign that says "Your are evil and going to Hell" is an opinion of their system of belief as told to them. Religion...created many, many years ago. According to statements of that religion, that statement on the sign is a fact. You may disagree with the sign and the religion but they are not being intolerant...they are stating a fact of their religion and an opinion of those personally.

If I show up at the scene of a crime and hold a sign that says "You are a murder and you are going to jail", am I intolerant or voicing an opinion?

I said I believe it is. Women are a protected class and abortion is fairly specific to women. If the sign appears to directly speak to the person walking in, I see it as bigotry. They carry much worse signs with blood and gore, I call that free speech. At the scene of a crime it may be defamation, as the murderer has not been convicted. When that person is convicted, murderers not being a protected class, your sign would not be bigotry.

originally posted by: reldra
"This is what you get when you cannot defend what you are defending. Nonsense as substance. Vapidity as intellectual rigor. In this arena, you have to rig the rules of the game so that it is actually as wrong, if not more so, to dare to call the wrongdoer (or the apologist for the wrongdoer) out. "

Defining Tolerance Via Bigot's Rights

Nonsence? At least I understand what a dictionary and a definition is. A bigot can't be a bigot? I wouldn't be calling someone else ignorant when you can't understand that what someone else is, doesn't change what you are.