Liberals are less tolerant of the views of others.

I would disagree with that definition. Being tolerant of others means accepting the viewpoint of another even when they disagree with your own viewpoint.

Tolerating your viewpoint does not require me to change my own, i.e. to accept yours. I tolerate it by acknowledging that hold it, nothing more.

It does not mean adopting said viewpoint. It also does not mean not arguing your case with the person, but rather doing so in a civil manner.

I'm not sure I see the distinction between what you are posting and what I posted.

I can be tolerant of Bodecea's viewpoint on gay marriage (or maybe I should say perceived viewpoint) and not agree with her. I can be tolerant of the pro-choice point of view and not agree with it.

Immie

True.

What you said in the first part of the reply was basically what I was saying.

Your second part, emphasized, doesn't seem to be what I got from your original statement. You said, "It means actually listening/reading the view of others, prior to comment", to me that says nothing at all about accepting the other person's right to their own opinion.

I can listen to another person's point of view and then immediately turn around and call them an idiot for holding that point of view. To me, that is not being tolerant.

Immie
 
I understand that liberals crack their eggs on the large side of the egg too.

Have you ever actually met a liberal?

Not if as Sallow says to be a liberal one must be tolerant.

That reminds me. I should thank Sallow. I've been going through kind of an identity crisis trying to decide if I am conservative or liberal. It seems to me, that with the intolerance displayed by both, I really don't want to be associated with either. Well, Sallow solved that question. :D

Immie
 
What does it really mean to be tolerant of others views...? In what context?


Often times in a forum like this, intelligent people tend to be intolerant of ignoramuses who think their opinion is significant to an issue which is not even a matter of opinion.


One could write a dissertation on a subject with complete sincerity and have their "views" completely dismissed as part of the greater discussion on a particular issue because intelligent people realize more readily what has already been established as beyond a practical point in the discussion. In going beyond the tedium and repetition of what is and what is not beside the point, or what is apples and oranges, etc...people often get emotional and feel their views have been "dismissed" by others cracking jokes or whatever perceived "intolerance", and it really is because a few people in the room already realize what the ranting ignoramus does not.



Please note, this happens on both ends of the political spectrum but... :eusa_whistle:
You think?
 
Not if as Sallow says to be a liberal one must be tolerant.

Of course, what I'm highlighting is the sloppy definition of what a liberal is. Sallow isn't a liberal, he is a leftist. He doesn't seek individual liberty. From his posts, he seeks a society where the state, under a benevolent, authoritarian ruler, determines most of the details of how a person will live their lives. How much money they can earn, what health care coverage they will have, what beliefs their churches can teach, etc.

That reminds me. I should thank Sallow. I've been going through kind of an identity crisis trying to decide if I am conservative or liberal. It seems to me, that with the intolerance displayed by both, I really don't want to be associated with either. Well, Sallow solved that question. :D

Immie

As I said, I am a liberal. Shallow, not so much...
 
That's not allowed... you're either with them, or a Marxist.

I mean, I'm all for Welfare reform that includes a "work for benefits" program, I'm basically anti-gun control, and I am also a Christian.

However, because I am Pro Universal Health Care, Pro-CHOICE(not pro-abortion), Pro Gay Rights, and feel that the key to our economic problems lie in higher wages for the people who actually drive the economy.... I'm considered to be a Marxist in their eyes.

Best Always to stand up for what you believe to be Just, it is not about what is popular, but what is the right thing to do. What good is any Club that you have to deny yourself in order to enter or participate?

Ummmm.... OK? Want to elaborate?

It's pretty much Self Explanatory. You have a perspective unique from Everyone Else. It has a Right to be heard, without Prejudice. It should stand or fall on it's own merit. Nothing new.
 
well, my post was as much connected to yours, as yours was to mine.

if you want to get a genuine response from me, try to address what i said, and/or express yourself more clearly.

I did address it. It was a clear explanation of how bias is developed, something you seem very unwilling to admit.

So before you spout off, how about posting where conservatives have for years shouted down liberal speakers.

thank you for your explanation of how bias is developped.

it is still bias.

i won't hop onto your turnip truck.

but remember the health care town halls?

I remember the cost projections just doubled.
 
Not if as Sallow says to be a liberal one must be tolerant.

Of course, what I'm highlighting is the sloppy definition of what a liberal is. Sallow isn't a liberal, he is a leftist. He doesn't seek individual liberty. From his posts, he seeks a society where the state, under a benevolent, authoritarian ruler, determines most of the details of how a person will live their lives. How much money they can earn, what health care coverage they will have, what beliefs their churches can teach, etc.

That reminds me. I should thank Sallow. I've been going through kind of an identity crisis trying to decide if I am conservative or liberal. It seems to me, that with the intolerance displayed by both, I really don't want to be associated with either. Well, Sallow solved that question. :D

Immie

As I said, I am a liberal. Shallow, not so much...

Now your sorta fixating and projecting at the same time.

In any case..my definition is accurate. And not that I'm a betting man..but I'd say you go with Republicans most of the time.

:D
 
Now your sorta fixating and projecting at the same time.

Jefferson was a liberal, Chavez a leftist. The views you express on this forum have zero correlation to Jefferson, but are very close to the policies of Chavez.

In any case..my definition is accurate.

In that whole 2+2 = cat way of thinking...

And not that I'm a betting man..but I'd say you go with Republicans most of the time.

:D

Yer not a real bright man either.

Last Republican I voted for in a presidential race was Ronald Reagan.
 
Studies have revealed that liberals are far less tolerant than conservatives when it comes to other peoples' opinions According to an article written by Thomas Lifson on March 13, 2012:

“The new research found that instead of engaging in civil discourse or debate, fully 16% of liberals admitted to blocking, unfriending or overtly hiding someone on a social networking site because that person expressed views they disagreed with. That's double the percentage of conservatives and more than twice the percentage of political moderates who behaved like that.”

Lifson also observed that liberals were more prone to change the subject or to become angry when someone disagrees with them:

“When the realization hits that a cherished belief might be wrong, negative emotions will rush in, and the conversation will be terminated by tears, a change of subject to another emotional topic (this is frequent with family members), or an angry outburst.”

Mr. Lifson's entire article can be read in The American Thinker, March 14, 2012 at the following link:

Blog: Liberal intolerance, by the numbers
If this were the case, then conservatives would not campaign against gay rights and gay marriage, or campaign against the freedom to choose, or campaign for school prayer. they would simply respect other people beliefs and values. but we all know that is not the case.

That's not the way it works.

There is a difference between disagreeing with someone's view and being intolerant of that view. Actually "tolerate" means to respect someone's views without sharing them. Merely campaigning against an issue such as gay rights does not demonstrate intolerance. One can be expected to campaign for what he believes in; that is natural and commendable. If the campaign is conducted with respect for - not necessarily agreement with - the opinion of others, there is no intolerance. An example of intolerance is when you insult someone because you disagree with him. When Obama supporters say all "birthers" are stupid, that is intolerance. I had someone give me a negative rep and accuse me of lacking critical thinking skills because I said something he disagreed with; that is intolerance. Even on this very thread, someone accused me of being a liar even though I did not lie and there is no evidence that I did; that is intolerance. Some people on this forum get absolutely nasty, especially when it comes to political discussions.

Unfortunately, their snide remarks add nothing to the discussion. As for me, I am not affected by the nasty comments. I am quite secure in the knowledge I have accumulated during my long lifetime, and I am amused by those who abandon rational debate in favor of personal attacks.

Actually, my experience has convinced me that liberals - on average - are in fact less tolerant than conservatives when it comes to the opinions of others.

Finally, there is a bit of irony in this whole thing. This thread started off to be a very simple affair. All I did was share the views of other people concerning the tolerance of various political groups and suddenly the thread becomes contaminated with the very intolerance that was the subject of the article I presented. I suppose I should thank some of you for proving that the author of the article was spot on.

OK, you all can have the last word. I'm outta here.

Be nice.
 
Now your sorta fixating and projecting at the same time.

Jefferson was a liberal, Chavez a leftist. The views you express on this forum have zero correlation to Jefferson, but are very close to the policies of Chavez.

In any case..my definition is accurate.

In that whole 2+2 = cat way of thinking...

And not that I'm a betting man..but I'd say you go with Republicans most of the time.

:D

Yer not a real bright man either.

Last Republican I voted for in a presidential race was Ronald Reagan.

I have a "correlation" with neither Chavez or Jefferson. I never started a revolution nor do I own slaves. And I wouldn't have had sex with one either..like um..Jefferson. That's sorta rape, no?

And forgive me if I don't believe you.

But I don't.
 
Studies have revealed that liberals are far less tolerant than conservatives when it comes to other peoples' opinions According to an article written by Thomas Lifson on March 13, 2012:

“The new research found that instead of engaging in civil discourse or debate, fully 16% of liberals admitted to blocking, unfriending or overtly hiding someone on a social networking site because that person expressed views they disagreed with. That's double the percentage of conservatives and more than twice the percentage of political moderates who behaved like that.”

Lifson also observed that liberals were more prone to change the subject or to become angry when someone disagrees with them:

“When the realization hits that a cherished belief might be wrong, negative emotions will rush in, and the conversation will be terminated by tears, a change of subject to another emotional topic (this is frequent with family members), or an angry outburst.”

Mr. Lifson's entire article can be read in The American Thinker, March 14, 2012 at the following link:

Blog: Liberal intolerance, by the numbers

American thinker is anything but.
 
I have a "correlation" with neither Chavez or Jefferson.

The positions you promote on this forum are VERY close to Chavez,

I never started a revolution nor do I own slaves. And I wouldn't have had sex with one either..like um..Jefferson. That's sorta rape, no?

I wasn't there - I have no reason to think that any sex that allegedly occurred was anything but conceptual.

And forgive me if I don't believe you.

But I don't.

I'm not a leftist, so what I post is true.
 

Forum List

Back
Top