Tolerance and Bigotry: What happens when the shoe is on the other foot?

[Spare_change]

Right, so you plan to do the same to the so called oppressors, right? They gave you hell so you want to give them hell back. How mature. Gays are playing the role of judge, condemning their oppressors in the same way their oppressors condemned them. How colossally ironic.

Funny how I have people accusing me of not knowing what tolerance is, yet here I see people like you issuing your own definitions of tolerance, while passing down judgement on those wicked bigoted Christians! Gays want to fight persecution of their way of life, yet fully intend to persecute those who don't "tolerate" them, i.e. those of faith.

How dare you fight for tolerance? You don't want tolerance, you want outright capitulation. You want revenge, not acceptance. You don't want to build, you wish to destroy.

So, I wonder, how long will you keep this up until it completely backfires on you?

The vast majority of gays do not march in parades, carry signs condemning anybody. Most people that are gay have lived much of their life in the closet, hiding their homosexuality. Even after they come out, most are reluctant to reveal themselves to all but family and close friends. As far as gay marriage is concerned, less than .1% of gays are married. Even it every gay and lesbian in the country married, 99% of all marriages would be between heterosexuals. The reality is that gay marriage effects a very small percent of the population. It's important to gays because it's a right they believe they should have, even though most will not every use that right.

Actually, I don't believe that ... I believe that gay marriage is an issue trotted out by the left in order to perpetuate their 'victimology' political agenda. It fits the narcissistic and egotistical need of leftists to prove they are better than everyone else because ONLY they know how to fix these self-created issues.

Then your belief is ridiculous, delusional idiocy.

Gay Americans didn't 'self create' the discrimination, the violation of their civil rights, or the hostility many on the right exhibit toward same-sex couples; there's nothing 'made up' about the many laws and measures enacted at the behest of conservatives with the intent to disadvantage gay Americans inconsistent with the 14th Amendment, or the many lawsuits filed by same-sex couples seeking relief from laws enacted to harm gay Americans by the states.

See what I mean?

You, and others, have elevated anecdotal data to pretend there is some kind of mainstream movement. When you have no facts - and you obviously don't, or you would have brought them to the table -- you make grandiose and general accusations and then assign them to the targeted party. Tell me --- just exactly how many gay discrimination lawsuits were filed in the past 20 years that were not instigated by liberal groups????

I rest my case.

Liberals fight for the rights of others. What's your beef with that?

Surely, deep down --- you don't believe that.

 

[NoNukes]

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

I know that tolerance works both ways. You liberal gay rights activists seem to think this should only work one way. Surrender or die.

How can someone like you lecture me on tolerance when you are a member of a party who exhibits intolerance towards those who hold negative opinions of homosexuality? How can someone such as yourself lecture me about tolerance when you belong to a party that wishes to crush their opposition beneath their oh-so-tolerant boots?

O liberal, where is your victory? O liberal, where is your sting?

You say 'my party'. when you cannot accuse me.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The vast majority of gays do not march in parades, carry signs condemning anybody. Most people that are gay have lived much of their life in the closet, hiding their homosexuality. Even after they come out, most are reluctant to reveal themselves to all but family and close friends. As far as gay marriage is concerned, less than .1% of gays are married. Even it every gay and lesbian in the country married, 99% of all marriages would be between heterosexuals. The reality is that gay marriage effects a very small percent of the population. It's important to gays because it's a right they believe they should have, even though most will not every use that right.

Actually, I don't believe that ... I believe that gay marriage is an issue trotted out by the left in order to perpetuate their 'victimology' political agenda. It fits the narcissistic and egotistical need of leftists to prove they are better than everyone else because ONLY they know how to fix these self-created issues.

Then your belief is ridiculous, delusional idiocy.

Gay Americans didn't 'self create' the discrimination, the violation of their civil rights, or the hostility many on the right exhibit toward same-sex couples; there's nothing 'made up' about the many laws and measures enacted at the behest of conservatives with the intent to disadvantage gay Americans inconsistent with the 14th Amendment, or the many lawsuits filed by same-sex couples seeking relief from laws enacted to harm gay Americans by the states.

See what I mean?

You, and others, have elevated anecdotal data to pretend there is some kind of mainstream movement. When you have no facts - and you obviously don't, or you would have brought them to the table -- you make grandiose and general accusations and then assign them to the targeted party. Tell me --- just exactly how many gay discrimination lawsuits were filed in the past 20 years that were not instigated by liberal groups????

I rest my case.

Liberals fight for the rights of others. What's your beef with that?

Surely, deep down --- you don't believe that.

Not only do I believe it, it's true.

 

[TemplarKormac]

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

I know that tolerance works both ways. You liberal gay rights activists seem to think this should only work one way. Surrender or die.

How can someone like you lecture me on tolerance when you are a member of a party who exhibits intolerance towards those who hold negative opinions of homosexuality? How can someone such as yourself lecture me about tolerance when you belong to a party that wishes to crush their opposition beneath their oh-so-tolerant boots?

O liberal, where is your victory? O liberal, where is your sting?

You say 'my party'. when you cannot accuse me.

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Of demanding tolerance of others while being intolerant of others. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

 

[NoNukes]

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

I know that tolerance works both ways. You liberal gay rights activists seem to think this should only work one way. Surrender or die.

How can someone like you lecture me on tolerance when you are a member of a party who exhibits intolerance towards those who hold negative opinions of homosexuality? How can someone such as yourself lecture me about tolerance when you belong to a party that wishes to crush their opposition beneath their oh-so-tolerant boots?

O liberal, where is your victory? O liberal, where is your sting?

You say 'my party'. when you cannot accuse me.

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Demanding tolerance while being intolerant. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

Could you give a few examples?

 

[Spare_change]

Actually, I don't believe that ... I believe that gay marriage is an issue trotted out by the left in order to perpetuate their 'victimology' political agenda. It fits the narcissistic and egotistical need of leftists to prove they are better than everyone else because ONLY they know how to fix these self-created issues.

Then your belief is ridiculous, delusional idiocy.

Gay Americans didn't 'self create' the discrimination, the violation of their civil rights, or the hostility many on the right exhibit toward same-sex couples; there's nothing 'made up' about the many laws and measures enacted at the behest of conservatives with the intent to disadvantage gay Americans inconsistent with the 14th Amendment, or the many lawsuits filed by same-sex couples seeking relief from laws enacted to harm gay Americans by the states.

See what I mean?

You, and others, have elevated anecdotal data to pretend there is some kind of mainstream movement. When you have no facts - and you obviously don't, or you would have brought them to the table -- you make grandiose and general accusations and then assign them to the targeted party. Tell me --- just exactly how many gay discrimination lawsuits were filed in the past 20 years that were not instigated by liberal groups????

I rest my case.

Liberals fight for the rights of others. What's your beef with that?

Surely, deep down --- you don't believe that.

Not only do I believe it, it's true.

No, as a matter of fact, it isn't --- liberals CREATE a crisis so they can ride in on their white horse and play the champion. It feeds their ego.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Then your belief is ridiculous, delusional idiocy.

Gay Americans didn't 'self create' the discrimination, the violation of their civil rights, or the hostility many on the right exhibit toward same-sex couples; there's nothing 'made up' about the many laws and measures enacted at the behest of conservatives with the intent to disadvantage gay Americans inconsistent with the 14th Amendment, or the many lawsuits filed by same-sex couples seeking relief from laws enacted to harm gay Americans by the states.

See what I mean?

You, and others, have elevated anecdotal data to pretend there is some kind of mainstream movement. When you have no facts - and you obviously don't, or you would have brought them to the table -- you make grandiose and general accusations and then assign them to the targeted party. Tell me --- just exactly how many gay discrimination lawsuits were filed in the past 20 years that were not instigated by liberal groups????

I rest my case.

Liberals fight for the rights of others. What's your beef with that?

Surely, deep down --- you don't believe that.

Not only do I believe it, it's true.

No, as a matter of fact, it isn't --- liberals CREATE a crisis so they can ride in on their white horse and play the champion. It feeds their ego.

Your dogma is of no interest to me.

 

[TemplarKormac]

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

I know that tolerance works both ways. You liberal gay rights activists seem to think this should only work one way. Surrender or die.

How can someone like you lecture me on tolerance when you are a member of a party who exhibits intolerance towards those who hold negative opinions of homosexuality? How can someone such as yourself lecture me about tolerance when you belong to a party that wishes to crush their opposition beneath their oh-so-tolerant boots?

O liberal, where is your victory? O liberal, where is your sting?

You say 'my party'. when you cannot accuse me.

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Demanding tolerance while being intolerant. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

Could you give a few examples?

Namely, your silence and lack of disagreement with far left liberals who participate in the kind of behavior for one, and posts like these:

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

Silence is complicity. Or in this case, silence and speech.

To wit, you even contradicted yourself. First, you say that you respect my opinion, but turn around and accuse me of "not understanding tolerance." That to me demonstrates the reality that despite your aura of tolerance, you are actually very intolerant of my opinion as demonstrated below, which in turn reveals your hypocrisy and implementation of double standards:

I respect that other people have the right to believe other than me and live their lives differently than I do.
If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone.

Need I say more?

 

[NoNukes]

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

I know that tolerance works both ways. You liberal gay rights activists seem to think this should only work one way. Surrender or die.

How can someone like you lecture me on tolerance when you are a member of a party who exhibits intolerance towards those who hold negative opinions of homosexuality? How can someone such as yourself lecture me about tolerance when you belong to a party that wishes to crush their opposition beneath their oh-so-tolerant boots?

O liberal, where is your victory? O liberal, where is your sting?

You say 'my party'. when you cannot accuse me.

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Demanding tolerance while being intolerant. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

Could you give a few examples?

Namely, your silence and lack of disagreement with far left liberals who participate in the kind of behavior for one, and posts like these:

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

Silence is complicity. Or in this case, silence and speech.

To wit, you even contradicted yourself. First, you say that you respect my opinion, but turn around and accuse me of "not understanding tolerance." That to me demonstrates the reality that despite your aura of tolerance, you are actually very intolerant of my opinion as demonstrated below, which in turn reveals your hypocrisy and implementation of double standards:

I respect that other people have the right to believe other than me and live their lives differently than I do.
If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone.

Need I say more?

Yes, give some relevant examples to prove your point.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I know that tolerance works both ways. You liberal gay rights activists seem to think this should only work one way. Surrender or die.

How can someone like you lecture me on tolerance when you are a member of a party who exhibits intolerance towards those who hold negative opinions of homosexuality? How can someone such as yourself lecture me about tolerance when you belong to a party that wishes to crush their opposition beneath their oh-so-tolerant boots?

O liberal, where is your victory? O liberal, where is your sting?

You say 'my party'. when you cannot accuse me.

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Demanding tolerance while being intolerant. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

Could you give a few examples?

Namely, your silence and lack of disagreement with far left liberals who participate in the kind of behavior for one, and posts like these:

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

Silence is complicity. Or in this case, silence and speech.

To wit, you even contradicted yourself. First, you say that you respect my opinion, but turn around and accuse me of "not understanding tolerance." That to me demonstrates the reality that despite your aura of tolerance, you are actually very intolerant of my opinion as demonstrated below, which in turn reveals your hypocrisy and implementation of double standards:

I respect that other people have the right to believe other than me and live their lives differently than I do.
If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone.

Need I say more?

Yes, give some relevant examples to prove your point.

I just did. Now refute them.

 

[NoNukes]

You say 'my party'. when you cannot accuse me.

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Demanding tolerance while being intolerant. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

Could you give a few examples?

Namely, your silence and lack of disagreement with far left liberals who participate in the kind of behavior for one, and posts like these:

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

Silence is complicity. Or in this case, silence and speech.

To wit, you even contradicted yourself. First, you say that you respect my opinion, but turn around and accuse me of "not understanding tolerance." That to me demonstrates the reality that despite your aura of tolerance, you are actually very intolerant of my opinion as demonstrated below, which in turn reveals your hypocrisy and implementation of double standards:

I respect that other people have the right to believe other than me and live their lives differently than I do.
If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone.

Need I say more?

Yes, give some relevant examples to prove your point.

I just did. Now refute them.

None of them are relevant, true examples.

Dictionary.com Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com

 

[TemplarKormac]

I know that tolerance works both ways. You liberal gay rights activists seem to think this should only work one way. Surrender or die.

How can someone like you lecture me on tolerance when you are a member of a party who exhibits intolerance towards those who hold negative opinions of homosexuality? How can someone such as yourself lecture me about tolerance when you belong to a party that wishes to crush their opposition beneath their oh-so-tolerant boots?

O liberal, where is your victory? O liberal, where is your sting?

You say 'my party'. when you cannot accuse me.

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Demanding tolerance while being intolerant. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

Could you give a few examples?

Namely, your silence and lack of disagreement with far left liberals who participate in the kind of behavior for one, and posts like these:

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

Silence is complicity. Or in this case, silence and speech.

To wit, you even contradicted yourself. First, you say that you respect my opinion, but turn around and accuse me of "not understanding tolerance." That to me demonstrates the reality that despite your aura of tolerance, you are actually very intolerant of my opinion as demonstrated below, which in turn reveals your hypocrisy and implementation of double standards:

I respect that other people have the right to believe other than me and live their lives differently than I do.
If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone.

Need I say more?

Yes, give some relevant examples to prove your point.

After giving it some more thought, I realized I should be more concise about my charges against you:

1. You by your own silence are guilty of hypocrisy and double standards by not speaking out against the behaviors that the mainstream of your party engage in against Christians regarding the issue of homosexuality.

2. And by that silence, you demonstrated complicity in the behavior of other members of your party or members who share like mind.

3. You also demonstrated your lack of tolerance and colossal duplicitousness when you stated how you "respected" my stances on homosexuality due to my Christian faith and also how you had no qualms with how I live my life. However, theretofore, you asked this pointed question: "How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?"

Such a question implies an assertion on its own, asserting that I am intolerant and therefore do not understand or are incapable of exercising tolerance for homosexuals or their relationships. A genetic argument, to be sure, which I have demonstrated repeatedly to be false. You have yet to show how I have "proven" that I "do not understand tolerance."

I thereby challenge you to back up this claim, or concede the point.

4. An additional point. After reading this statement:

"If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone."

Am I to assume that such a belief should be confined only between members of a faith? That they shouldn't speak out based their belief because of their "intolerance"? Or is it that simply not everyone shares their belief? If it is the former, then that would yet be another contradiction, and would belie your so-called "tolerance" of other peoples opinions and beliefs.

However, if it is the latter, then I agree. Not everyone will share the same opinion on homosexual relationships. But I might add that you can't force them to have a favorable opinion of homosexual relationships in the same stead.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Demanding tolerance while being intolerant. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

Could you give a few examples?

Namely, your silence and lack of disagreement with far left liberals who participate in the kind of behavior for one, and posts like these:

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

Silence is complicity. Or in this case, silence and speech.

To wit, you even contradicted yourself. First, you say that you respect my opinion, but turn around and accuse me of "not understanding tolerance." That to me demonstrates the reality that despite your aura of tolerance, you are actually very intolerant of my opinion as demonstrated below, which in turn reveals your hypocrisy and implementation of double standards:

I respect that other people have the right to believe other than me and live their lives differently than I do.
If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone.

Need I say more?

Yes, give some relevant examples to prove your point.

I just did. Now refute them.

None of them are relevant, true examples.

Dictionary.com Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com

Yet, here you are, still not refuting any of them. "That isn't true or relevant" is a classic deflection tactic. Not even the dictionary can save you now.

 

[Spare_change]

See what I mean?

You, and others, have elevated anecdotal data to pretend there is some kind of mainstream movement. When you have no facts - and you obviously don't, or you would have brought them to the table -- you make grandiose and general accusations and then assign them to the targeted party. Tell me --- just exactly how many gay discrimination lawsuits were filed in the past 20 years that were not instigated by liberal groups????

I rest my case.

Liberals fight for the rights of others. What's your beef with that?

Surely, deep down --- you don't believe that.

Not only do I believe it, it's true.

No, as a matter of fact, it isn't --- liberals CREATE a crisis so they can ride in on their white horse and play the champion. It feeds their ego.

Your dogma is of no interest to me.

See what I mean?

You, and others, have elevated anecdotal data to pretend there is some kind of mainstream movement. When you have no facts - and you obviously don't, or you would have brought them to the table -- you make grandiose and general accusations and then assign them to the targeted party. Tell me --- just exactly how many gay discrimination lawsuits were filed in the past 20 years that were not instigated by liberal groups????

I rest my case.

Liberals fight for the rights of others. What's your beef with that?

Surely, deep down --- you don't believe that.

Not only do I believe it, it's true.

No, as a matter of fact, it isn't --- liberals CREATE a crisis so they can ride in on their white horse and play the champion. It feeds their ego.

Your dogma is of no interest to me.

My only dogma is trying to prevent you from spreading the lies of liberalism.

 

[NoNukes]

You say 'my party'. when you cannot accuse me.

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Demanding tolerance while being intolerant. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

Could you give a few examples?

Namely, your silence and lack of disagreement with far left liberals who participate in the kind of behavior for one, and posts like these:

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

Silence is complicity. Or in this case, silence and speech.

To wit, you even contradicted yourself. First, you say that you respect my opinion, but turn around and accuse me of "not understanding tolerance." That to me demonstrates the reality that despite your aura of tolerance, you are actually very intolerant of my opinion as demonstrated below, which in turn reveals your hypocrisy and implementation of double standards:

I respect that other people have the right to believe other than me and live their lives differently than I do.
If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone.

Need I say more?

Yes, give some relevant examples to prove your point.

After giving it some more thought, I realized I should be more concise about my charges against you:

1. You by your own silence are guilty of hypocrisy and double standards by not speaking out against the behaviors that the mainstream of your party engage in against Christians regarding the issue of homosexuality.

2. And by that silence, you demonstrated complicity in the behavior of other members of your party or members who share like mind.

3. You also demonstrated your lack of tolerance and colossal duplicitousness when you stated how you "respected" my stances on homosexuality due to my Christian faith and also how you had no qualms with how I live my life. However, theretofore, you asked this pointed question: "How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?"

Such a question implies an assertion on its own, asserting that I am intolerant and therefore do not understand or are incapable of exercising tolerance for homosexuals or their relationships. A genetic argument, to be sure, which I have demonstrated repeatedly to be false. You have yet to show how I have "proven" that I "do not understand tolerance."

I thereby challenge you to back up this claim, or concede the point.

4. An additional point. After reading this statement:

"If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone."

Am I to assume that such a belief should be confined only between members of a faith? That they shouldn't speak out based their belief because of their "intolerance"? Or is it that simply not everyone shares their belief? If it is the former, then that would yet be another contradiction, and would belie your so-called "tolerance" of other peoples opinions and beliefs.

However, if it is the latter, then I agree. Not everyone will share the same opinion on homosexual relationships. But I might add that you can't force them to have a favorable opinion of homosexual relationships in the same stead.

Laws should not be made or refuted because of someone's religious beliefs. A religious person should show tolerance to someone else's beliefs if they expect people to respect their beliefs.
I am not a 'party man', I believe what I think to be right or wrong.

As for my silence, some of us have jobs and careers and cannot sit on a message board all day.

 

[Moonglow]

Eh... perhaps the OP is too long? Or am I simply being the fat jobless twinkie eating man that I am by even bringing it up?

So you finally admit your failures and weakness...........welcome to the real world.....We're all ridin' in a hand basket on our whey to Hell.... Just ask jeri...

 

[Moonglow]

Liberals fight for the rights of others. What's your beef with that?

Surely, deep down --- you don't believe that.

Not only do I believe it, it's true.

No, as a matter of fact, it isn't --- liberals CREATE a crisis so they can ride in on their white horse and play the champion. It feeds their ego.

Your dogma is of no interest to me.

Liberals fight for the rights of others. What's your beef with that?

Surely, deep down --- you don't believe that.

Not only do I believe it, it's true.

No, as a matter of fact, it isn't --- liberals CREATE a crisis so they can ride in on their white horse and play the champion. It feeds their ego.

Your dogma is of no interest to me.

My only dogma is trying to prevent you from spreading the lies of liberalism.

Dude, he is not a liberal....

 

[Moonglow]

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Demanding tolerance while being intolerant. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

Could you give a few examples?

Namely, your silence and lack of disagreement with far left liberals who participate in the kind of behavior for one, and posts like these:

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

Silence is complicity. Or in this case, silence and speech.

To wit, you even contradicted yourself. First, you say that you respect my opinion, but turn around and accuse me of "not understanding tolerance." That to me demonstrates the reality that despite your aura of tolerance, you are actually very intolerant of my opinion as demonstrated below, which in turn reveals your hypocrisy and implementation of double standards:

I respect that other people have the right to believe other than me and live their lives differently than I do.
If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone.

Need I say more?

Yes, give some relevant examples to prove your point.

After giving it some more thought, I realized I should be more concise about my charges against you:

1. You by your own silence are guilty of hypocrisy and double standards by not speaking out against the behaviors that the mainstream of your party engage in against Christians regarding the issue of homosexuality.

2. And by that silence, you demonstrated complicity in the behavior of other members of your party or members who share like mind.

3. You also demonstrated your lack of tolerance and colossal duplicitousness when you stated how you "respected" my stances on homosexuality due to my Christian faith and also how you had no qualms with how I live my life. However, theretofore, you asked this pointed question: "How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?"

Such a question implies an assertion on its own, asserting that I am intolerant and therefore do not understand or are incapable of exercising tolerance for homosexuals or their relationships. A genetic argument, to be sure, which I have demonstrated repeatedly to be false. You have yet to show how I have "proven" that I "do not understand tolerance."

I thereby challenge you to back up this claim, or concede the point.

4. An additional point. After reading this statement:

"If homosexual relationships are against someone's religion, that pertains to members of that religion, not everyone."

Am I to assume that such a belief should be confined only between members of a faith? That they shouldn't speak out based their belief because of their "intolerance"? Or is it that simply not everyone shares their belief? If it is the former, then that would yet be another contradiction, and would belie your so-called "tolerance" of other peoples opinions and beliefs.

However, if it is the latter, then I agree. Not everyone will share the same opinion on homosexual relationships. But I might add that you can't force them to have a favorable opinion of homosexual relationships in the same stead.

Laws should not be made or refuted because of someone's religious beliefs. A religious person should show tolerance to someone else's beliefs if they expect people to respect their beliefs.
I am not a 'party man', I believe what I think to be right or wrong.

The very thing wrong with Sharia laws is a mandatory rigid system which suffocates tolerance and freedom...

 

[Darkwind]

Tolerance stops at intolerance. Now you know.

Perhaps you should practice what you preach.

I do. As long as you keep your bigotry limited to speech and not actions, unless it's in a private sphere (clubs, churches, homes, etc.) have at it.

You can have the No ******* Club, but not the No ******* Bakery. That is where tolerance ends.

I usually take a 2x4 across the nose of people who tell Me I can't have a moral belief. That is where MY tolerance ends.

 

[Seawytch]

How can someone who has proven that he does not understand tolerance start a thread on it?

I know that tolerance works both ways. You liberal gay rights activists seem to think this should only work one way. Surrender or die.

How can someone like you lecture me on tolerance when you are a member of a party who exhibits intolerance towards those who hold negative opinions of homosexuality? How can someone such as yourself lecture me about tolerance when you belong to a party that wishes to crush their opposition beneath their oh-so-tolerant boots?

O liberal, where is your victory? O liberal, where is your sting?

You say 'my party'. when you cannot accuse me.

I accuse you of blatant hypocrisy. Of demanding tolerance of others while being intolerant of others. I accuse you of employing double standards against your peers.

What intolerance is being show to these "others"? Is anyone trying to pass laws that would prohibit them from marrying each other...actual Constitutional amendments? Are they being denied service in public accommodations? Oh wait, that would be against the law wouldn't it? See, 'cause religion is protected from discrimination in Public Accommodation in all 50 states by Federal law.