The Liberal Commitment.....

[NoNukes]

I'm for letting the good people of the great city of Denver govern their city as they choose, within the limits of their power as a local government.

Why aren't you? Somehow that makes you the totalitarian doesn't it?

What they do in Denver directly effects her life in Brooklyn.

That's because I'm an American, with the values that Americans should have.

You're excused from both.

That would be known as an opinion. If your values are the values that Americans should have, no wonder the country is going down the drain.

My values include free speech and freedom of thought.

And your problem with those values?

Did you oppose Giuliani shutting down the so-called gentlemen's clubs?

I'm for letting the good people of the great city of Denver govern their city as they choose, within the limits of their power as a local government.

Why aren't you? Somehow that makes you the totalitarian doesn't it?

What they do in Denver directly effects her life in Brooklyn.

That's because I'm an American, with the values that Americans should have.

You're excused from both.

That would be known as an opinion. If your values are the values that Americans should have, no wonder the country is going down the drain.

My values include free speech and freedom of thought.

And your problem with those values?

Did you oppose Giuliani shutting down the so-called gentlemen's clubs?

Or attempting to censor the art world.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Seems not all Americans are of the bigoted ....I mean Liberal, stripe....and there was quite a bit of anger at Smith....



7. "Smith received backlash from the public after posting the video and was even fired from his position as CFO at Vante, A Tucson medical manufacturing company.

He was prompted to then post the second video, a nearly eight-minute mea culpa in which he apologized to Rachel.

“Rachel, I am so very sorry for the way I spoke to you on Wednesday,” Smith begins on the video, “You handled my frustrating rant with such dignity and composure. Every time I watch the video I am blown away by really the beauty in what you did, and your kindness, and your patience with me.”

Rachel—told FoxNews.com. “I want to see if he was sincere and let him know why I handled it the way I did and not take legal action, which a lot of people told me I should do.”

“I’m Christian and God tells us to love thy neighbor,” she added referring to how she kept the exchange polite on her end. “One of my friends saw they video and said, ‘Yep that’s Rachel and that’s the way she is.” Arizona Chick-fil-A worker berated on viral video wants to meet with bully



Perhaps more Liberals require that sort of lesson.

 

[Dot Com]

You have yet to prove that the city council is all progressives...

She's yet to prove that the right of local governments to govern is totalitarianism. She's already conceded that bans on abortion clinics don't bother her.

^ that

/end thread

 

[Debra K]

....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief...



.....simply doesn't exist. I'll prove it,

A prime example of thought-crime police, patrolled and enforced by your Liberal government:

Yesterday:
"The Denver City Council is taking its time deciding whether Chick-fil-A, whose CEO is opposed to gay marriage, should be allowed to open a restaurant in the Denver airport." Denver puts Chick-fil-A's restaurant bid on back burner



What happens to those who dare to have an opinion that differs from that endorsed by Liberals/Progressives/Democrats?
Pay attention:


1. Once upon a time in America....actually, in the summer of 2012, a fast food CEO became embroiled in a battle because he had an opinion that ran counter to the Liberal viewpoint.

"In July 2012, [Dan] Cathy made headlines when he said "guilty as charged" in response to a question about whether the company was in"support of the traditional family.".... his views on same-sex marriage have not changed.

"I think the time of truths and principles are captured and codified in God’s word and I’m just personally committed to that,” he told the AJC [The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ].

“I know others feel very different from that and I respect their opinion and I hope that they would be respectful of mine.
[Get that? He's obviously not a Liberal.]
... I think that’s a political debate that’s going to rage on. And the wiser thing for us to do is to stay focused on customer service.”

... last June when the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, [he tweetied], "Sad day for our nation; founding fathers would be ashamed of our gen. to abandon wisdom of the ages re: cornerstone of strong societies."
Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy Speaks Out On Gay Marriage Controversy




2. Of course, Liberals responded with their version of 'the Liberal Commitment.....

....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief.....'

a. Salon called Cathy ' an unapologetic homophobe' Chick-fil-A: Antibiotic-free, but still pretty terrible - Salon.com

b. And the Village Voice wrote " homophobic chicken peddler/Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy." Chick-Fil-A Flap: Brooklyn Republican Invites Homophobic Chicken Peddler Dan Cathy To Open Restaurant

c. And Slate: " Racism persists, but at least racists have been formally politically defanged. Homophobes, meanwhile, have not." The Chick-fil-A Fried Chicken Fiasco Is a Harsh Reminder of the Hatred That Gays and Lesbians Face



3. And those bastions of Liberal indoctrination, the universities, showed their open-mindedness:

a. " Emory University dumps Chick-fil-A....." Emory University dumps Chick-fil-A


b. "Colleges Rally to Kick Chick-fil-A Off Campus" Colleges Rally To Kick Chick-fil-A Off Campus



Reminder to all: Chick-fil-A has never been accused of discriminating in any way against gay customers, or against any employees.

None. Not once.



Did I mention that 'The Liberal Commitment.....
....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief' .....doesn't exist.


Just wait...it gets better.

Her opening post is just another example of right wing hypocrisy and failure to recognize the "tolerance paradox".

Right wingers demand the right to be intolerant, to voice their bigotry, and to practice unlawful discrimination without adverse consequences.

Any opposition to right wing intolerance, bigotry, and discrimination is labeled as "liberal intolerance". Intolerance of right wing intolerance is not tolerated by right wingers. Whew. To right wingers, the only "rights" that matter are their perceived "rights".

For instance, Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel ... the person/organization that is defending County Clerk Kim Davis's "right" to discriminate during the course of her official duties as an agent for the State of Kentucky ... called for a boycott of Target and backed boycotts and pressure campaigns against McDonalds, Starbucks, Lowe’s, Pay Pal, and companies that say “Happy Holidays.” - See more at: For Conservatives, Boycotts Are Noble Efforts When They Support Them, Otherwise It's 'Economic Terrorism'

You're kidding, right? Every time the left's delicate feelings get hurt they scream for a boycott.

The difference between the left-wing vs. right-wing dichotomy on the issue of tolerance is that the left-wing is "right" and the right-wing is "wrong".

The left-wing is intolerant of right-wing hate and bigotry and unlawful discrimination. The right-wing is intolerant of left-wing intolerance for right-wing intolerance. Got that?

Many of your posts have been stupid, or incoherent.....

This one shows an abject lack of understanding of both 'tolerance' and of the Left.

They punish any who think differently.

To show how utterly ignorant you are, let's see you mumble through this: Barack Obama had publicly professed the exact same views and values as Dan Cathy a mere two months earlier.


If you had a knowledge of history, you'd have seen the same turnaround by your predecessors, the communists, who were pacifists until June 22, 1941, when Hitler attacked Stalin.

Lefts were with Obama's defense of marriage until he suddenly wasn't.

Between the two of us, I'm not the one who is from Planet Stupid ... so your insult is humorous.

Getting back to the actual content of this thread, you have alleged that liberals are intolerant and I agree to this extent: Liberals are intolerant of conservatives' intolerance ... and two negatives make a positive ... in favor of liberals.

Let's take this hypothetical:

Conservatives are notorious witch-burners. They are intolerant of people whom they have branded as witches and believe they have the right to burn them at the stake.

On the other hand, Liberals are intolerant of conservative witch burners. I mean, why can't the conservatives just let the witches live and perhaps buy a cake at the local bakery?

If Liberals can stop the witch burnings, that's a positive thing.

I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past.

 

[David_42]

....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief...



.....simply doesn't exist. I'll prove it,

A prime example of thought-crime police, patrolled and enforced by your Liberal government:

Yesterday:
"The Denver City Council is taking its time deciding whether Chick-fil-A, whose CEO is opposed to gay marriage, should be allowed to open a restaurant in the Denver airport." Denver puts Chick-fil-A's restaurant bid on back burner



What happens to those who dare to have an opinion that differs from that endorsed by Liberals/Progressives/Democrats?
Pay attention:


1. Once upon a time in America....actually, in the summer of 2012, a fast food CEO became embroiled in a battle because he had an opinion that ran counter to the Liberal viewpoint.

"In July 2012, [Dan] Cathy made headlines when he said "guilty as charged" in response to a question about whether the company was in"support of the traditional family.".... his views on same-sex marriage have not changed.

"I think the time of truths and principles are captured and codified in God’s word and I’m just personally committed to that,” he told the AJC [The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ].

“I know others feel very different from that and I respect their opinion and I hope that they would be respectful of mine.
[Get that? He's obviously not a Liberal.]
... I think that’s a political debate that’s going to rage on. And the wiser thing for us to do is to stay focused on customer service.”

... last June when the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, [he tweetied], "Sad day for our nation; founding fathers would be ashamed of our gen. to abandon wisdom of the ages re: cornerstone of strong societies."
Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy Speaks Out On Gay Marriage Controversy




2. Of course, Liberals responded with their version of 'the Liberal Commitment.....

....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief.....'

a. Salon called Cathy ' an unapologetic homophobe' Chick-fil-A: Antibiotic-free, but still pretty terrible - Salon.com

b. And the Village Voice wrote " homophobic chicken peddler/Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy." Chick-Fil-A Flap: Brooklyn Republican Invites Homophobic Chicken Peddler Dan Cathy To Open Restaurant

c. And Slate: " Racism persists, but at least racists have been formally politically defanged. Homophobes, meanwhile, have not." The Chick-fil-A Fried Chicken Fiasco Is a Harsh Reminder of the Hatred That Gays and Lesbians Face



3. And those bastions of Liberal indoctrination, the universities, showed their open-mindedness:

a. " Emory University dumps Chick-fil-A....." Emory University dumps Chick-fil-A


b. "Colleges Rally to Kick Chick-fil-A Off Campus" Colleges Rally To Kick Chick-fil-A Off Campus



Reminder to all: Chick-fil-A has never been accused of discriminating in any way against gay customers, or against any employees.

None. Not once.



Did I mention that 'The Liberal Commitment.....
....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief' .....doesn't exist.


Just wait...it gets better.

Her opening post is just another example of right wing hypocrisy and failure to recognize the "tolerance paradox".

Right wingers demand the right to be intolerant, to voice their bigotry, and to practice unlawful discrimination without adverse consequences.

Any opposition to right wing intolerance, bigotry, and discrimination is labeled as "liberal intolerance". Intolerance of right wing intolerance is not tolerated by right wingers. Whew. To right wingers, the only "rights" that matter are their perceived "rights".

For instance, Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel ... the person/organization that is defending County Clerk Kim Davis's "right" to discriminate during the course of her official duties as an agent for the State of Kentucky ... called for a boycott of Target and backed boycotts and pressure campaigns against McDonalds, Starbucks, Lowe’s, Pay Pal, and companies that say “Happy Holidays.” - See more at: For Conservatives, Boycotts Are Noble Efforts When They Support Them, Otherwise It's 'Economic Terrorism'

You're kidding, right? Every time the left's delicate feelings get hurt they scream for a boycott.

The difference between the left-wing vs. right-wing dichotomy on the issue of tolerance is that the left-wing is "right" and the right-wing is "wrong".

The left-wing is intolerant of right-wing hate and bigotry and unlawful discrimination. The right-wing is intolerant of left-wing intolerance for right-wing intolerance. Got that?

Many of your posts have been stupid, or incoherent.....

This one shows an abject lack of understanding of both 'tolerance' and of the Left.

They punish any who think differently.

To show how utterly ignorant you are, let's see you mumble through this: Barack Obama had publicly professed the exact same views and values as Dan Cathy a mere two months earlier.


If you had a knowledge of history, you'd have seen the same turnaround by your predecessors, the communists, who were pacifists until June 22, 1941, when Hitler attacked Stalin.

Lefts were with Obama's defense of marriage until he suddenly wasn't.

Between the two of us, I'm not the one who is from Planet Stupid ... so your insult is humorous.

Getting back to the actual content of this thread, you have alleged that liberals are intolerant and I agree to this extent: Liberals are intolerant of conservatives' intolerance ... and two negatives make a positive ... in favor of liberals.

Let's take this hypothetical:

Conservatives are notorious witch-burners. They are intolerant of people whom they have branded as witches and believe they have the right to burn them at the stake.

On the other hand, Liberals are intolerant of conservative witch burners. I mean, why can't the conservatives just let the witches live and perhaps buy a cake at the local bakery?

If Liberals can stop the witch burnings, that's a positive thing.

I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past.

You post rarely, but your posts are brilliant, especially when it comes to dealing with PC.

 

[CremeBrulee]

It goes further than just one man's opinion though. The democratically elected leadership of Denver is debating whether or not to allow a family's business to operate in a public building when profits from said enterprise help fund organizations that actively lobby lawmakers to deny equal rights to millions of Americans.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Between the two of us, I'm not the one who is from Planet Stupid ... so your insult is humorous.

Getting back to the actual content of this thread, you have alleged that liberals are intolerant and I agree to this extent: Liberals are intolerant of conservatives' intolerance ... and two negatives make a positive ... in favor of liberals.

Let's take this hypothetical:

Conservatives are notorious witch-burners. They are intolerant of people whom they have branded as witches and believe they have the right to burn them at the stake.

On the other hand, Liberals are intolerant of conservative witch burners. I mean, why can't the conservatives just let the witches live and perhaps buy a cake at the local bakery?

If Liberals can stop the witch burnings, that's a positive thing.

I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past.[/QUOTE]


1. I didn't insult you.
I accurately described you.

2. "I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past."
I provided two examples from history...one, WWII, one recent.

Since you couldn't find either to be inaccurate, it pretty much destroys any cachet on your part.

3. You 'inaccuracy' represents your view in every other area,as well.

4. Specifically, your misunderstanding of "intolerance."
It is defined as follows: "1. lack of toleration;unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, "

Pretty much a summary of Liberal attack on Dan Cathy and Chick fil A.


Don't make these mistakes again.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief...



.....simply doesn't exist. I'll prove it,

A prime example of thought-crime police, patrolled and enforced by your Liberal government:

Yesterday:
"The Denver City Council is taking its time deciding whether Chick-fil-A, whose CEO is opposed to gay marriage, should be allowed to open a restaurant in the Denver airport." Denver puts Chick-fil-A's restaurant bid on back burner



What happens to those who dare to have an opinion that differs from that endorsed by Liberals/Progressives/Democrats?
Pay attention:


1. Once upon a time in America....actually, in the summer of 2012, a fast food CEO became embroiled in a battle because he had an opinion that ran counter to the Liberal viewpoint.

"In July 2012, [Dan] Cathy made headlines when he said "guilty as charged" in response to a question about whether the company was in"support of the traditional family.".... his views on same-sex marriage have not changed.

"I think the time of truths and principles are captured and codified in God’s word and I’m just personally committed to that,” he told the AJC [The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ].

“I know others feel very different from that and I respect their opinion and I hope that they would be respectful of mine.
[Get that? He's obviously not a Liberal.]
... I think that’s a political debate that’s going to rage on. And the wiser thing for us to do is to stay focused on customer service.”

... last June when the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, [he tweetied], "Sad day for our nation; founding fathers would be ashamed of our gen. to abandon wisdom of the ages re: cornerstone of strong societies."
Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy Speaks Out On Gay Marriage Controversy




2. Of course, Liberals responded with their version of 'the Liberal Commitment.....

....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief.....'

a. Salon called Cathy ' an unapologetic homophobe' Chick-fil-A: Antibiotic-free, but still pretty terrible - Salon.com

b. And the Village Voice wrote " homophobic chicken peddler/Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy." Chick-Fil-A Flap: Brooklyn Republican Invites Homophobic Chicken Peddler Dan Cathy To Open Restaurant

c. And Slate: " Racism persists, but at least racists have been formally politically defanged. Homophobes, meanwhile, have not." The Chick-fil-A Fried Chicken Fiasco Is a Harsh Reminder of the Hatred That Gays and Lesbians Face



3. And those bastions of Liberal indoctrination, the universities, showed their open-mindedness:

a. " Emory University dumps Chick-fil-A....." Emory University dumps Chick-fil-A


b. "Colleges Rally to Kick Chick-fil-A Off Campus" Colleges Rally To Kick Chick-fil-A Off Campus



Reminder to all: Chick-fil-A has never been accused of discriminating in any way against gay customers, or against any employees.

None. Not once.



Did I mention that 'The Liberal Commitment.....
....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief' .....doesn't exist.


Just wait...it gets better.

I think this should have read... Liberals should be committed".

 

[PoliticalChic]

It goes further than just one man's opinion though. The democratically elected leadership of Denver is debating whether or not to allow a family's business to operate in a public building when profits from said enterprise help fund organizations that actively lobby lawmakers to deny equal rights to millions of Americans.

Must be a good enough reason to deny free speech, free thought, difference of opinion....
..well, good enough for a fascist.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Pretty much a summary of Liberal attack on Dan Cathy and Chick fil A.

I attacked him today. Oh wait, I attacked you, while eating Chick-fil-A waffle fries...

 

[PoliticalChic]

....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief...



.....simply doesn't exist. I'll prove it,

A prime example of thought-crime police, patrolled and enforced by your Liberal government:

Yesterday:
"The Denver City Council is taking its time deciding whether Chick-fil-A, whose CEO is opposed to gay marriage, should be allowed to open a restaurant in the Denver airport." Denver puts Chick-fil-A's restaurant bid on back burner



What happens to those who dare to have an opinion that differs from that endorsed by Liberals/Progressives/Democrats?
Pay attention:


1. Once upon a time in America....actually, in the summer of 2012, a fast food CEO became embroiled in a battle because he had an opinion that ran counter to the Liberal viewpoint.

"In July 2012, [Dan] Cathy made headlines when he said "guilty as charged" in response to a question about whether the company was in"support of the traditional family.".... his views on same-sex marriage have not changed.

"I think the time of truths and principles are captured and codified in God’s word and I’m just personally committed to that,” he told the AJC [The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ].

“I know others feel very different from that and I respect their opinion and I hope that they would be respectful of mine.
[Get that? He's obviously not a Liberal.]
... I think that’s a political debate that’s going to rage on. And the wiser thing for us to do is to stay focused on customer service.”

... last June when the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, [he tweetied], "Sad day for our nation; founding fathers would be ashamed of our gen. to abandon wisdom of the ages re: cornerstone of strong societies."
Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy Speaks Out On Gay Marriage Controversy




2. Of course, Liberals responded with their version of 'the Liberal Commitment.....

....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief.....'

a. Salon called Cathy ' an unapologetic homophobe' Chick-fil-A: Antibiotic-free, but still pretty terrible - Salon.com

b. And the Village Voice wrote " homophobic chicken peddler/Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy." Chick-Fil-A Flap: Brooklyn Republican Invites Homophobic Chicken Peddler Dan Cathy To Open Restaurant

c. And Slate: " Racism persists, but at least racists have been formally politically defanged. Homophobes, meanwhile, have not." The Chick-fil-A Fried Chicken Fiasco Is a Harsh Reminder of the Hatred That Gays and Lesbians Face



3. And those bastions of Liberal indoctrination, the universities, showed their open-mindedness:

a. " Emory University dumps Chick-fil-A....." Emory University dumps Chick-fil-A


b. "Colleges Rally to Kick Chick-fil-A Off Campus" Colleges Rally To Kick Chick-fil-A Off Campus



Reminder to all: Chick-fil-A has never been accused of discriminating in any way against gay customers, or against any employees.

None. Not once.



Did I mention that 'The Liberal Commitment.....
....to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief' .....doesn't exist.


Just wait...it gets better.

I think this should have read... Liberals should be committed".

But then the rest of us have to pay for three hots and a cot.

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. Now....one more illustration. In an earlier time in America we saw 'Jim Crow,' an example of Democrat liberal big government in action.

Big Democrat government punished any who didn't agree with segregation.


Now, we see big Democrat government punishing any who don't agree with their current social engineering.


a. "... Boston Mayor Thomas Menino vowed to block the fast food chain from opening a franchise in his city,...
Boston Mayor To Chick-Fil-A President: Anti-Gay Stance Is 'Insult' To City

and

“If they need licenses in the city, it will be very difficult,” Menino said. " Boston Mayor Blocks Chick-fil-A Franchise from City over Homophobic Attitude | TIME.com


b. " A Chicago alderman wants to kill Chick-fil-A's plansto build a restaurant in his increasingly trendy Northwest Side ward because the fast-food chain's top executive vocally opposes gay marriage.... The alderman has the ideological support of Mayor Rahm Emanuel. "Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values," the mayor said ..."
Chicago alderman wants to block Chick-fil-A from opening in his ward


c. "Edwin M. Lee, mayor of the progressive city, tweeted Thursday night: "Very disappointed #ChickFilA doesn't share San Francisco's values & strong commitment to equality for everyone."

He also added a warning to his subsequent tweet: "Closest #ChickFilAto San Francisco is 40 miles away & I strongly recommend that they not try to come any closer."
San Francisco is the third city to tell Chick-fil-A: Keep out





9. "Mark Twain— 'History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme.'

a. Civil rights lunch counter sit-ins:

"As we approached Hemming Park," Girardeau recalled, "we saw several white men wearing Confederate uniforms. Other whites walked around Hemming Park carrying ax handles with Confederate battle flags taped to them. A sign taped to a delivery-type van parked at the Duval and Hogan Streets corner of Hemming Park read, 'Free Ax Handles.'
Veterans of the Civil Rights Movement -- It was never about a hot dog and a Coke!


Seems these blacks didn't share the "local Democrat values."

Democrats used to use ax handles....now they use regulation, but for the same purposes.


Chick-fil-A has never been accused of discriminating in any way against gay customers, or against any employees.

None.




Liberal thought-police in action!

QED...a Liberal commitment to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief...

.....simplydoesn't exist.

 

[CremeBrulee]

It goes further than just one man's opinion though. The democratically elected leadership of Denver is debating whether or not to allow a family's business to operate in a public building when profits from said enterprise help fund organizations that actively lobby lawmakers to deny equal rights to millions of Americans.

Must be a good enough reason to deny free speech, free thought, difference of opinion....
..well, good enough for a fascist.

So you are willing to deny the people that actually live in Denver the same rights and call them fascists for exercising due diligence when it comes to Chick-fil-A adhering (which they probably do) to local ordinances concerning discrimination based on sexual orientation. You don't think that is a bit hypocritical?

 

[PoliticalChic]

It goes further than just one man's opinion though. The democratically elected leadership of Denver is debating whether or not to allow a family's business to operate in a public building when profits from said enterprise help fund organizations that actively lobby lawmakers to deny equal rights to millions of Americans.

Must be a good enough reason to deny free speech, free thought, difference of opinion....
..well, good enough for a fascist.

So you are willing to deny the people that actually live in Denver the same rights and call them fascists for exercising due diligence when it comes to Chick-fil-A adhering (which they probably do) to local ordinances concerning discrimination based on sexual orientation. You don't think that is a bit hypocritical?

I haven't denied anyone any right.
You have....or, the Democrats you support, have.

You have no right to penalize folks for what they think.

The hypocrisy is entirely yours.

Thought crimes are not the American way.

No matter the pretend, tortuous invention of them giving money to some lobbying group....they have done nothing to anybody.

Reminder to all: Chick-fil-A has never been accused of discriminating in any way against gay customers, or against any employees.

None. Not once.


So, yes...any who support punishing disagreement are fascists.

 

[washamericom]

And here we have a perfect example of the premise of this thread:
Opposition to to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief...


One more Lock-Step Totalitarian...er, Liberal.

Do you feel the same about local/state government measures to shut down abortion clinics?

Let's be clear....aside from your usual attempts, lies and obfuscation...

....are you claiming that the act of taking the life of a human being is identical to serving customers a chicken sandwich?

No. You don't have a constitutional right to sell someone a chicken sandwich.

This is one of your weakest lies.

Care to show where the Constitution says same?


Now, since you 'omitted' any answer to my question...
"....are you claiming that the act of taking the life of a human being is identical to serving customers a chicken sandwich..."

...it is clear that even you recognize what a stupid comment you made.

If you had a constitutional right to sell chicken sandwiches wherever you pleased than no zoning laws or city regulations concerning the opening of a chicken restaurant would be constitutional.

You lost this argument btw when you flip flopped on your position based on your personal agenda.

free range chicken sandwiches ?

 

[Debra K]

Between the two of us, I'm not the one who is from Planet Stupid ... so your insult is humorous.

Getting back to the actual content of this thread, you have alleged that liberals are intolerant and I agree to this extent: Liberals are intolerant of conservatives' intolerance ... and two negatives make a positive ... in favor of liberals.

Let's take this hypothetical:

Conservatives are notorious witch-burners. They are intolerant of people whom they have branded as witches and believe they have the right to burn them at the stake.

On the other hand, Liberals are intolerant of conservative witch burners. I mean, why can't the conservatives just let the witches live and perhaps buy a cake at the local bakery?

If Liberals can stop the witch burnings, that's a positive thing.

I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past.

1. I didn't insult you.
I accurately described you.

2. "I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past."
I provided two examples from history...one, WWII, one recent.

Since you couldn't find either to be inaccurate, it pretty much destroys any cachet on your part.

3. You 'inaccuracy' represents your view in every other area,as well.

4. Specifically, your misunderstanding of "intolerance."
It is defined as follows: "1. lack of toleration;unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, "

Pretty much a summary of Liberal attack on Dan Cathy and Chick fil A.


Don't make these mistakes again.

Sticking to the content of this thread, here is someone I just thought about. Kim Davis. Do you know of her? She's the notorious county clerk who refuses to issue marriage licenses because she is unwilling to respect the opinion of the United States Supreme Court. I think Kim Davis is intolerant.

If Kim Davis is representative of Conservatives, I think she is launching a conservative attack on America.

Do you think I'm mistaken? Please advise.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Between the two of us, I'm not the one who is from Planet Stupid ... so your insult is humorous.

Getting back to the actual content of this thread, you have alleged that liberals are intolerant and I agree to this extent: Liberals are intolerant of conservatives' intolerance ... and two negatives make a positive ... in favor of liberals.

Let's take this hypothetical:

Conservatives are notorious witch-burners. They are intolerant of people whom they have branded as witches and believe they have the right to burn them at the stake.

On the other hand, Liberals are intolerant of conservative witch burners. I mean, why can't the conservatives just let the witches live and perhaps buy a cake at the local bakery?

If Liberals can stop the witch burnings, that's a positive thing.

I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past.

1. I didn't insult you.
I accurately described you.

2. "I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past."
I provided two examples from history...one, WWII, one recent.

Since you couldn't find either to be inaccurate, it pretty much destroys any cachet on your part.

3. You 'inaccuracy' represents your view in every other area,as well.

4. Specifically, your misunderstanding of "intolerance."
It is defined as follows: "1. lack of toleration;unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, "

Pretty much a summary of Liberal attack on Dan Cathy and Chick fil A.


Don't make these mistakes again.

Sticking to the content of this thread, here is someone I just thought about. Kim Davis. Do you know of her? She's the notorious county clerk who refuses to issue marriage licenses because she is unwilling to respect the opinion of the United States Supreme Court. I think Kim Davis is intolerant.

If Kim Davis is representative of Conservatives, I think she is launching a conservative attack on America.

Do you think I'm mistaken? Please advise.

Do you think the Supreme Court correctly decided the Dred Scott case?
Please advise.

 

[Debra K]

Between the two of us, I'm not the one who is from Planet Stupid ... so your insult is humorous.

Getting back to the actual content of this thread, you have alleged that liberals are intolerant and I agree to this extent: Liberals are intolerant of conservatives' intolerance ... and two negatives make a positive ... in favor of liberals.

Let's take this hypothetical:

Conservatives are notorious witch-burners. They are intolerant of people whom they have branded as witches and believe they have the right to burn them at the stake.

On the other hand, Liberals are intolerant of conservative witch burners. I mean, why can't the conservatives just let the witches live and perhaps buy a cake at the local bakery?

If Liberals can stop the witch burnings, that's a positive thing.

I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past.

1. I didn't insult you.
I accurately described you.

2. "I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past."
I provided two examples from history...one, WWII, one recent.

Since you couldn't find either to be inaccurate, it pretty much destroys any cachet on your part.

3. You 'inaccuracy' represents your view in every other area,as well.

4. Specifically, your misunderstanding of "intolerance."
It is defined as follows: "1. lack of toleration;unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, "

Pretty much a summary of Liberal attack on Dan Cathy and Chick fil A.


Don't make these mistakes again.

Sticking to the content of this thread, here is someone I just thought about. Kim Davis. Do you know of her? She's the notorious county clerk who refuses to issue marriage licenses because she is unwilling to respect the opinion of the United States Supreme Court. I think Kim Davis is intolerant.

If Kim Davis is representative of Conservatives, I think she is launching a conservative attack on America.

Do you think I'm mistaken? Please advise.

Do you thing the Supreme Court correctly decided the Dred Scott case?
Please advise.

Yes. Way back in the 1850's, the Supreme Court applied the law and found that slaves were not citizens because, essentially, they were brought to America as property (not as people with rights). All that changed, however, with the post-Civil War amendments to the Constitution.

Nevertheless, are you suggesting that the left vs. right dichotomy on the issue of tolerance all hinges upon the correctness of someone's viewpoint?

Are you saying that Conservatives may be intolerant of "incorrect" viewpoints, but that is not "intolerance" as you defined it?

If Dan Cathy and his chicken palace donate millions of dollars to proverbial witch burners for the purpose of supporting their witch burning activity, and there is a public backlash because other people find his viewpoint "incorrect", how would you characterize that public backlash? tolerant or intolerant?

Who gets to decide if a viewpoint is or is not correct?

 

[Slyhunter]

You seem to have a big problem with government by the will of the people.

And here we have a perfect example of the premise of this thread:
Opposition to to tolerance, freedom of thought, and belief...


One more Lock-Step Totalitarian...er, Liberal.

I'm for letting the good people of the great city of Denver govern their city as they choose, within the limits of their power as a local government.

Why aren't you? Somehow that makes you the totalitarian doesn't it?

Let's outlaw Muslim Restaurants then.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Between the two of us, I'm not the one who is from Planet Stupid ... so your insult is humorous.

Getting back to the actual content of this thread, you have alleged that liberals are intolerant and I agree to this extent: Liberals are intolerant of conservatives' intolerance ... and two negatives make a positive ... in favor of liberals.

Let's take this hypothetical:

Conservatives are notorious witch-burners. They are intolerant of people whom they have branded as witches and believe they have the right to burn them at the stake.

On the other hand, Liberals are intolerant of conservative witch burners. I mean, why can't the conservatives just let the witches live and perhaps buy a cake at the local bakery?

If Liberals can stop the witch burnings, that's a positive thing.

I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past.

1. I didn't insult you.
I accurately described you.

2. "I think your knowledge of history needs some work ... because, maybe burning "witches" actually happened in the past."
I provided two examples from history...one, WWII, one recent.

Since you couldn't find either to be inaccurate, it pretty much destroys any cachet on your part.

3. You 'inaccuracy' represents your view in every other area,as well.

4. Specifically, your misunderstanding of "intolerance."
It is defined as follows: "1. lack of toleration;unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, "

Pretty much a summary of Liberal attack on Dan Cathy and Chick fil A.


Don't make these mistakes again.

Sticking to the content of this thread, here is someone I just thought about. Kim Davis. Do you know of her? She's the notorious county clerk who refuses to issue marriage licenses because she is unwilling to respect the opinion of the United States Supreme Court. I think Kim Davis is intolerant.

If Kim Davis is representative of Conservatives, I think she is launching a conservative attack on America.

Do you think I'm mistaken? Please advise.

Do you thing the Supreme Court correctly decided the Dred Scott case?
Please advise.

Yes. Way back in the 1850's, the Supreme Court applied the law and found that slaves were not citizens because, essentially, they were brought to America as property (not as people with rights). All that changed, however, with the post-Civil War amendments to the Constitution.

Nevertheless, are you suggesting that the left vs. right dichotomy on the issue of tolerance all hinges upon the correctness of someone's viewpoint?

Are you saying that Conservatives may be intolerant of "incorrect" viewpoints, but that is not "intolerance" as you defined it?

If Dan Cathy and his chicken palace donate millions of dollars to proverbial witch burners for the purpose of supporting their witch burning activity, and there is a public backlash because other people find his viewpoint "incorrect", how would you characterize that public backlash? tolerant or intolerant?

Who gets to decide if a viewpoint is or is not correct?

1. So you agree with the Dred Scott decision.
Because the elites decided it that way.
Right thinking folks would find the decision reprehensible.
And, unlike you, folks who know history would remind you that the decision was not based on 'law,' but on the deal that Taney made with Buchanan.


2. Earlier, you actually said "I think your knowledge of history needs some work."
Turns out, that was the joke of the day.

3. "If Dan Cathy and his chicken palace donate millions of dollars to proverbial witch burners for the purpose of supporting their witch burning activity,"
Please....provide such a 'proverb' that refers to witch burning, and links to gay marriage.
'Else, you appear to be quite the windbag.


4. There was no such " a public backlash" based on Dan Cathy's statements.
There was only fascists in government and academia punishing a dissenting viewpoint.
"Chick-Fil-A Sales Soar In 2012 Despite Bad PR"
Chick-Fil-A Sales Soar Despite Bad PR

You're really looking more and more like a fool, aren't you.


5. "Nevertheless, are you suggesting that the left vs. right dichotomy on the issue of tolerance all hinges upon the correctness of someone's viewpoint?"
I don't 'suggest,' I make very clear what I believe.
One must be quite the dunce not to understand my views: anyone can have any view...including fascists such as you.
That's freedom in America.
But when you use the power of government to punish different views.....that's not American values.