Liberals are less tolerant of the views of others.

[Uncensored2008]

[
Self hatred is at the root of liberalism.

Stupidity is the root of leftism.

 

[GuyPinestra]

wow... look at that... the most intolerant views expressed in this thread about the intolerance of liberals... came from liberals.

Who would have known?

Think they've blocked us yet??

One can only hope...

 

[Syphon]

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.

so does the right simply disagree with people who are gay then or are they intolerant of their lifestyle? disagreement would suggest that they simply dont like the lifestyle. while intolerance would mean that they are actively campaigning against that lifestyle and condemning it at such. with the rise of such law to limit gay rights including survivor benefits, marriage, tax benefits and such, one can only conclude that the right is intolerant of gay. gay bashing is a hate crime, and can be punished as such.

so who is more intolerant in this picture?

 

[Dr.Traveler]

I've been giving the OP a lot of thought, and came to two conclusions:

1. The OP is predicated on the idea that unfriending or blocking a poster is indicative of being less tolerant. That actually is not true.

Just because I don't care personally to hear your opinion does not mean that I would deny you the right to have that opinion. For example: I'm fairly supportive of protection from descriminiation for homosexuals. However, I don't feel the need to watch Will and Grace or Modern Family simply because of its positive portrayal of homosexuals. I'm also supportive of Rap Music thanks to my support of freedom of speech. Doesn't mean I listen to it at all.

Conservatives on the other hand are often happy to seek out that they disagree with. However, their goal isn't to learn, but to bully and beat down or characterize as Unamerican.

There are folks on this board I've blocked. The reason why is that no matter what is posted, their reply to the topic at hand is always devoid of substance and always involves personal attacks. If they have nothing to add to a conversation, why bother reading them? There are a few posters I could name by name that if I grabbed their last twenty posts I guarantee that 18 or more of them would involve nothing but name calling, racial slurs, and gripes about marxists commie pinko homo leftists. Why bother? That leads to the second point....

2. If a person is wrong, refuses to learn, and denies everything when presented with facts or is otherwise vulgar, why should I put up with them?

I recently did unfriend two folks on Facebook. The first posted an image of Rick Santorum made from a collage of images from gay porn. Seriously WTF. I have two kids. If they'd popped up behind me on Facebook when that post came up.... I mean seriously! WTF. I don't want to even have to explain that.

I support that person's right be mad and offended at Rick Santorum. I Support whole heartedly their freedom to express that anger. I don't have to read it. Biblically you're only supposed to focus on what is pure, holy, and upright. I don't have time for gay porn in my friend feed.

The other person repeatedly posted birther nonsense. The whole birther thing has been throughly debunked. It essentially hangs around now as a way for racists to try to look slightly less "racist". If you're going to hold on to that view after it's been pretty throughly debunked, feel free to do so on your own time. Again, I support that person's freedom to be stupid and look stupid. I don't have to participate.

So if being unwilling to tolerate folks that choose to be vulgar or stupid makes me less tolerant, then fine. I'm intolerant. Truth be told the world could probably use more intolerance when it comes to Stupid.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The basic tenet of today's left is a variation of Voltaire.

The left proclaims "I don't agree with what you say, and will fight to the death to silence you."

 

[DCJ]

The basic tenet of today's left is a variation of Voltaire.

The left proclaims "I don't agree with what you say, and will fight to the death to silence you."

Funny, that sounds a lot like what I see both sides doing-all the time......

 

[BlindBoo]

Hahahaha, gee I wonder where you're going with that one (ya big government stooge!)

Yes I have. Why?

Well, you leftists aren't very tolerant of liberals....

Coming from a partisan hack, you calling anyone names means zip, zero absolutely nada.

I see you making proclamations against those who disagree with you, yet offer no proof. For example you said Sallow's position were closer to Chavez. How so? Does Sallow propose forced land redistribution like Chavez? How about nationalizing our oil fields in this country? Any leftist here proposing that?

 

[L.K.Eder]

I've been giving the OP a lot of thought, and came to two conclusions:

1. The OP is predicated on the idea that unfriending or blocking a poster is indicative of being less tolerant. That actually is not true.

Just because I don't care personally to hear your opinion does not mean that I would deny you the right to have that opinion. For example: I'm fairly supportive of protection from descriminiation for homosexuals. However, I don't feel the need to watch Will and Grace or Modern Family simply because of its positive portrayal of homosexuals. I'm also supportive of Rap Music thanks to my support of freedom of speech. Doesn't mean I listen to it at all.

Conservatives on the other hand are often happy to seek out that they disagree with. However, their goal isn't to learn, but to bully and beat down or characterize as Unamerican.

There are folks on this board I've blocked. The reason why is that no matter what is posted, their reply to the topic at hand is always devoid of substance and always involves personal attacks. If they have nothing to add to a conversation, why bother reading them? There are a few posters I could name by name that if I grabbed their last twenty posts I guarantee that 18 or more of them would involve nothing but name calling, racial slurs, and gripes about marxists commie pinko homo leftists. Why bother? That leads to the second point....

2. If a person is wrong, refuses to learn, and denies everything when presented with facts or is otherwise vulgar, why should I put up with them?

I recently did unfriend two folks on Facebook. The first posted an image of Rick Santorum made from a collage of images from gay porn. Seriously WTF. I have two kids. If they'd popped up behind me on Facebook when that post came up.... I mean seriously! WTF. I don't want to even have to explain that.

I support that person's right be mad and offended at Rick Santorum. I Support whole heartedly their freedom to express that anger. I don't have to read it. Biblically you're only supposed to focus on what is pure, holy, and upright. I don't have time for gay porn in my friend feed.

The other person repeatedly posted birther nonsense. The whole birther thing has been throughly debunked. It essentially hangs around now as a way for racists to try to look slightly less "racist". If you're going to hold on to that view after it's been pretty throughly debunked, feel free to do so on your own time. Again, I support that person's freedom to be stupid and look stupid. I don't have to participate.

So if being unwilling to tolerate folks that choose to be vulgar or stupid makes me less tolerant, then fine. I'm intolerant. Truth be told the world could probably use more intolerance when it comes to Stupid.

awesome post.

i wish i had written it. but i am too lazy for that.

 

[OtaniKitano]

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:....

{{{Rollling eyes...}}} One must always ask the most important question of all: Who is funding the study?






<threads merged>

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

This will NOT come as a shock to any media person to the Right of Michael Moore:

Not exactly shocking news for those exposed to them for years, but the respected Pew Research Center has determined that political liberals are far less tolerant of opposing views than regular Americans.

In a new study, the Pew Center for the Internet and American Life Project confirmed what most intelligent Americans had long sensed. That is, whenever they are challenged or confronted on the hollow falsity of their orthodoxy -- such as, say, uniting diverse Americans -- liberals tend to respond defensively with anger, even trying to shut off or silence critics. (i.e. photo above of President Obama reacting to Boston hecklers.)

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.

The proportion jumps even higher when someone on a social site disagrees with a liberal's post.

Only 1% of moderates would block or shut out someone who dared to disagree with them, compared to 11% of liberals, whose rate was nearly three times that of conservatives.

Not only that, but the Left is far more comfortable with spokespeople/campaign donors who make overtly sexist/vulgar/hateful comments about their political opponents. For example, the same National Organization of Women that denounces radio hosts for words like “slut” just announced that the Obama campaign should keep a $1 million donation from Bill Maher, who uses the words “c**t” and “tw#t” to describe conservative women.

Because that’s different. Because....uh, er...uh....BUSH LIED PEOPLE DIED!

Whatever.

Anyone surprised that the Left is more hate-filled, profane and intolerant than the Right considering how the left's rhetoric is always about how hatefilled nad intolerant the right is?

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Not news to anyone who has spent any amount of time on this board. Liberals usually use a lot more violent rhetoric (Along the lines of "I would like to take the lot of you, tie you up in a bag and drown you" which was the response of one liberal poster here to something he disliked)

That the very unbalanced Pew folks would do this is very unusual and surprising

 

[Baruch Menachem]

At best, this suggests differences in social networking behavior associated with political views, and nothing more.

There's probably a dozen things wrong with this analysis, such as the undefined categories of "very conservative, conservative, moderate, liberal, very liberal" for example, but I'm just not in the mood to hash it out at the moment.

or you could just say what's true...

that the o/p is a liar.

you know... that whole, lies, lies and damned lies thing. *shrug*

but maybe if he/she/it says it often enough, that will make it true.

You post proves his assertion true, even as you deny it. When you are presented by assertions outside your point of view you ignore his arguments and attack him personally as a liar. That is pretty much liberal bigot SOP.

Facts exist, whether you like them or not. The way to deal with them is either face them or find where the errors are. Not to stick your fingers in your ears and shout the guy down.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

At best, this suggests differences in social networking behavior associated with political views, and nothing more.

There's probably a dozen things wrong with this analysis, such as the undefined categories of "very conservative, conservative, moderate, liberal, very liberal" for example, but I'm just not in the mood to hash it out at the moment.

or you could just say what's true...

that the o/p is a liar.

you know... that whole, lies, lies and damned lies thing. *shrug*

but maybe if he/she/it says it often enough, that will make it true.

You post proves his assertion true, even as you deny it. When you are presented by assertions outside your point of view you ignore his arguments and attack him personally as a liar. That is pretty much liberal bigot SOP.

Facts exist, whether you like them or not. The way to deal with them is either face them or find where the errors are. Not to stick your fingers in your ears and shout the guy down.

You read my mind.

 

[Ravi]

I've been giving the OP a lot of thought, and came to two conclusions:

1. The OP is predicated on the idea that unfriending or blocking a poster is indicative of being less tolerant. That actually is not true.

Just because I don't care personally to hear your opinion does not mean that I would deny you the right to have that opinion. For example: I'm fairly supportive of protection from descriminiation for homosexuals. However, I don't feel the need to watch Will and Grace or Modern Family simply because of its positive portrayal of homosexuals. I'm also supportive of Rap Music thanks to my support of freedom of speech. Doesn't mean I listen to it at all.

Conservatives on the other hand are often happy to seek out that they disagree with. However, their goal isn't to learn, but to bully and beat down or characterize as Unamerican.

There are folks on this board I've blocked. The reason why is that no matter what is posted, their reply to the topic at hand is always devoid of substance and always involves personal attacks. If they have nothing to add to a conversation, why bother reading them? There are a few posters I could name by name that if I grabbed their last twenty posts I guarantee that 18 or more of them would involve nothing but name calling, racial slurs, and gripes about marxists commie pinko homo leftists. Why bother? That leads to the second point....

2. If a person is wrong, refuses to learn, and denies everything when presented with facts or is otherwise vulgar, why should I put up with them?

I recently did unfriend two folks on Facebook. The first posted an image of Rick Santorum made from a collage of images from gay porn. Seriously WTF. I have two kids. If they'd popped up behind me on Facebook when that post came up.... I mean seriously! WTF. I don't want to even have to explain that.

I support that person's right be mad and offended at Rick Santorum. I Support whole heartedly their freedom to express that anger. I don't have to read it. Biblically you're only supposed to focus on what is pure, holy, and upright. I don't have time for gay porn in my friend feed.

The other person repeatedly posted birther nonsense. The whole birther thing has been throughly debunked. It essentially hangs around now as a way for racists to try to look slightly less "racist". If you're going to hold on to that view after it's been pretty throughly debunked, feel free to do so on your own time. Again, I support that person's freedom to be stupid and look stupid. I don't have to participate.

So if being unwilling to tolerate folks that choose to be vulgar or stupid makes me less tolerant, then fine. I'm intolerant. Truth be told the world could probably use more intolerance when it comes to Stupid.

awesome post.

i wish i had written it. but i am too lazy for that.

I'd like to tie you in a bad and throw you in a lake!!!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Studies have revealed that...

...conservatives without a clue, but with an agenda, will always clump liberals in with progressives, leftists, socialists, anything, just to conflate things.

 

[L.K.Eder]

I've been giving the OP a lot of thought, and came to two conclusions:

1. The OP is predicated on the idea that unfriending or blocking a poster is indicative of being less tolerant. That actually is not true.

Just because I don't care personally to hear your opinion does not mean that I would deny you the right to have that opinion. For example: I'm fairly supportive of protection from descriminiation for homosexuals. However, I don't feel the need to watch Will and Grace or Modern Family simply because of its positive portrayal of homosexuals. I'm also supportive of Rap Music thanks to my support of freedom of speech. Doesn't mean I listen to it at all.

Conservatives on the other hand are often happy to seek out that they disagree with. However, their goal isn't to learn, but to bully and beat down or characterize as Unamerican.

There are folks on this board I've blocked. The reason why is that no matter what is posted, their reply to the topic at hand is always devoid of substance and always involves personal attacks. If they have nothing to add to a conversation, why bother reading them? There are a few posters I could name by name that if I grabbed their last twenty posts I guarantee that 18 or more of them would involve nothing but name calling, racial slurs, and gripes about marxists commie pinko homo leftists. Why bother? That leads to the second point....

2. If a person is wrong, refuses to learn, and denies everything when presented with facts or is otherwise vulgar, why should I put up with them?

I recently did unfriend two folks on Facebook. The first posted an image of Rick Santorum made from a collage of images from gay porn. Seriously WTF. I have two kids. If they'd popped up behind me on Facebook when that post came up.... I mean seriously! WTF. I don't want to even have to explain that.

I support that person's right be mad and offended at Rick Santorum. I Support whole heartedly their freedom to express that anger. I don't have to read it. Biblically you're only supposed to focus on what is pure, holy, and upright. I don't have time for gay porn in my friend feed.

The other person repeatedly posted birther nonsense. The whole birther thing has been throughly debunked. It essentially hangs around now as a way for racists to try to look slightly less "racist". If you're going to hold on to that view after it's been pretty throughly debunked, feel free to do so on your own time. Again, I support that person's freedom to be stupid and look stupid. I don't have to participate.

So if being unwilling to tolerate folks that choose to be vulgar or stupid makes me less tolerant, then fine. I'm intolerant. Truth be told the world could probably use more intolerance when it comes to Stupid.

awesome post.

i wish i had written it. but i am too lazy for that.

I'd like to tie you in a bad and throw you in a lake!!!

careful, i might defriend you on foolbook.

 

[Ravi]

awesome post.

i wish i had written it. but i am too lazy for that.

I'd like to tie you in a bad and throw you in a lake!!!

careful, i might defriend you on foolbook.

Too late, I've already defriended you.

Now spend a week crying about it you pathetic little dweeb.

 

[L.K.Eder]

I'd like to tie you in a bad and throw you in a lake!!!

careful, i might defriend you on foolbook.

Too late, I've already defriended you.

Now spend a week crying about it you pathetic little dweeb.

go wash your dildos, assbrain.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

"Hate Crimes" ???? lol

Known to every other American who is not a womanly progressive as, well...... a Crime..........

but hats off to whatever blue state , ivy league elitist , and victims studies graduate who invented the concept.........................

 

[Ravi]

careful, i might defriend you on foolbook.

Too late, I've already defriended you.

Now spend a week crying about it you pathetic little dweeb.

go wash your dildos, assbrain.

I've just blocked you. Be careful, I will put you on ignore next.