Who are the real bigots?

[JakeStarkey]

Learn to use the fracking quote button.

Let me help you out. He was quoting from the link you posted in the OP. And his response to it was spot on.

I know what he was quoting, but the way he quoted it actually violated copyright laws by not giving proper attribution. Being as he is a wannabe lawyer in grade school, he needs to avoid breaking the law in such obvious, if trivial, ways. It also totally missed the entire point of the blog I linked to, which means it was far from spot on.

The post was indeed spot on. QWB is indeed a blow bag, who violates general procedure as well as integrity when he posts. This poster is one of the least respected on the board for excellent reason.

 

[drsmith1072]

Your unfounded assumption was that I oppose same sex marriage, I don't. That assumption was based on your lack of tolerance, oi your idiocy. I chose to assume the least offensive option since you chose to interpret my offensiveness as intolerance,

The Prime Minister of Australia is openly atheist, lives with a man who she is not married to, and opposes same sex marriage, go ask her what her rational for it is. Don't be surprised if it doesn't have anything to do with religion. Why should I answer a question that, if you truly want an answer to, you can learn the answers for yourself?I only research questions for two reasons, 1) I am curious about the answer, or 2) I get paid for my time.

So I was right about the head games.

All you've proved in this thread is that you might be worth disregarding in the future.

If, by head games, you mean I am pointing out how calling people bigots does not make them bigots

WHo has done that? Based on the definitons that I provided they are indeed bigots based on their actios and their positions. So as far as I can tell no one is merely calling them bigots without justification. Based on their own actions they define themselves as such.

or that assuming the only possible explanation for not supporting same sex marriage is religious ignores the fact that there are outspoken atheists that oppose it,

When the core of the argument against it is that they need to protect the sanctity of marriage then yes the only explanation is a religious one. How many atheists fit your argument? got any real numbers or a reason why?

then I plead guilty to head games.

your "head games" are more along the lines of strawman arguments and providing only the definiton of "bigot" that fits your needs as you exclude all others.

If it makes you more comfortable to ignore me in the future so you don't have to deal with your own bigotry, feel free to do so.

If you actually want to grow, I suggest you pay attention to everyone, even the idiots, because I have seen everyone on this board have flashes of genius, even the asshole racists like Tank and Salt Jones.

says the poster who started this thread based on how you "dismiss everyone who disagrees with their <your> views" by calling them "small minded."

 

[Cowman]

As conservatives would have people believe, black people are the real racists and homosexuals are the real bigots.

And in one sense they would also be right - why do we believe that black people are less racist than white, or gay people less bigoted than straight?

I suspect bigotry and hatred exist around the world, across all ages, races and religions. It just may not always be directed in the way that we would expect.

Whoosh. Right over your head. I said the real racists, as in the ones who are racist as opposed to anybody else.

Of course there are racists across all ages, races and religions. You'd have to be dumb to think otherwise.

Conservatives have a unique ability of defending racist people and throwing back the racist moniker onto the victims of derogatory racial commentary. After all, "reverse racism" is the only racism that exists, and gays are oppressing the ability of people to discriminate.

 

[Cowman]

Gays are always on the prowl looking for new victims; so yes, they are predators of the worse kind.

I think it's possible that you believe that.

Much more than just possible; it's 100% the truth.

Thanks for admitting that you're a delusional idiot.

 

[koshergrl]

As conservatives would have people believe, black people are the real racists and homosexuals are the real bigots.

And in one sense they would also be right - why do we believe that black people are less racist than white, or gay people less bigoted than straight?

I suspect bigotry and hatred exist around the world, across all ages, races and religions. It just may not always be directed in the way that we would expect.

Whoosh. Right over your head. I said the real racists, as in the ones who are racist as opposed to anybody else.

Of course there are racists across all ages, races and religions. You'd have to be dumb to think otherwise.

Conservatives have a unique ability of defending racist people and throwing back the racist moniker onto the victims of derogatory racial commentary. After all, "reverse racism" is the only racism that exists, and gays are oppressing the ability of people to discriminate.

I have a dear friend who is a professor at USC who believes racism is particular to white people. She doesn't think non-white people can be racist.

 

[koshergrl]

Let me help you out. He was quoting from the link you posted in the OP. And his response to it was spot on.

I know what he was quoting, but the way he quoted it actually violated copyright laws by not giving proper attribution. Being as he is a wannabe lawyer in grade school, he needs to avoid breaking the law in such obvious, if trivial, ways. It also totally missed the entire point of the blog I linked to, which means it was far from spot on.

The post was indeed spot on. QWB is indeed a blow bag, who violates general procedure as well as integrity when he posts. This poster is one of the least respected on the board for excellent reason.

Irony.

And what "general procedure" is violated when QW posts?

You don't make sense, compounded by lying, per usual.

 

[Immanuel]

Bigotry comes in all shapes and sizes. It comes from all political and sociological aspects.

Look in the mirror. You will probably see a bigot, because quite frankly, bigotry is human nature. Some can and do control it within them, but we all have our prejudices.

When I was reading this post by drsmith:

big·ot
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
bigot - definition of bigot by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

big·ot
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
Bigot - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

I guess it all depends upon what you choose as your definition of the word now doesn't it? It seems to me based on these other defitions that bigot applies quite well.

Now are you going "to dismiss everyone who disagrees with their (your) views" as you "suggest that everyone who thinks that the bigots are the people that vote against same sex marriage are small minded" as you stated in your post?

Funny how it's wrong to dismiss the "bigots" even as you dismiss others because they disagree with you.

I could not but help to think that the second definition he presented fits him to a "T". There are others on the board who are "obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices", but he most definitely fits the definition IMHO.

Funny but you don't even know me so how can you make such a judgement without it being based on your own bias and intolerance of those who dare disagree with you?



I have voted for a republicans in the past. Jack kingston comes to mind when I was stationed at HAAF in savannah, ga. I have civil conversations with civil conservatives all of the time. Maybe if the conservatives here were more civil things would change but most of what shows up here is the worst of the party.



Yes I know and like several. Some are even engaged in politics. gasp!



Based on the fact that I already do your assumptions aare nothing but your own bias and intolerance as you try to frame someone based on your own false assumptions about liberals. Kind of bigoted on your part.



funny you mention that since that is exactly what the author of this thread did in the op.



You are wrong but I doubt that you will have the integrity to admit it.



Already have and still doing so today. however, based on your own posts you are not and never truly will.



HUH? The same rightwing that argues against big government never fails to use big government to try to enforce their religious and moral beliefs through legislation. Although I do agree that women do not want the government to tell them what to do with their body it's interesting that the right has no qualms with using big government to do just that.



WOW! As a true conservative that shouldn't have been a step in evolving it should have been ingrained in your system. However, many conservatives seem to have issue with hypocrisy on the big government front. It's bad when they disagree with it but they appear to have no problem with it when they desire such interference.

Therefore, the government needs to establish civil union laws and all "marriages" need to be established under civil union contracts. Churches should be free to marry whomever they want, but a "marriage" should not be given any special priviliges by the state. Those are two areas. There are others, but I am still not willing to claim that I am not a bigot. I have my prejudices just like everyone else.

That's a good step however as long as the right uses big government to legitmize discrimination and get praised for doing so I will reseve the right to call them out for their hypocrisy.

So, how, many of you are willing to be open minded and change your long held beliefs or are you willing to look yourself in the mirror and admit that you are a bigot?

Immie

Your entire argument is flawed based on your bias and intolerance of liberals. You have an idea that you believe is representative of all liberals and that applies to me when it doesn't. Thanks for the spin.

Thank you for answering the question. I must tell you that I did not expect that.

You are wrong though, I do know you. I know you from your posts and you are in line with the other leftwing wackos on here who have never made a single post where they said a decent thing about a conservative.

This was my question:

drsmith, when was the last time your position "evolved"?

This was your answer:

I have voted for a republicans in the past. Jack kingston comes to mind when I was stationed at HAAF in savannah, ga. I have civil conversations with civil conservatives all of the time. Maybe if the conservatives here were more civil things would change but most of what shows up here is the worst of the party.

You didn't answer the question. Have your positions ever "evolved"?

The next question you answered. Thank you.

The next question, I should have put "If not," in front.

Your next answer proves you are not very intelligent. I have already discussed the OP. No reason for me to do so again. Here was your answer:

funny you mention that since that is exactly what the author of this thread did in the op.

I was responding to your post because you have a history of bigotry on this site that is almost beyond compare.

Next question:

Are you willing to "evolve"?

Next answer:

Already have and still doing so today. however, based on your own posts you are not and never truly will.

Since you didn't give any examples, can I ask did you evolve into being an asshole when you joined the site and are you hoping on changing back?

Next in regards to my example you came up with this, what I am certain you consider intelligent response. It makes no sense:

HUH? The same rightwing that argues against big government never fails to use big government to try to enforce their religious and moral beliefs through legislation. Although I do agree that women do not want the government to tell them what to do with their body it's interesting that the right has no qualms with using big government to do just that.

Do you see me defending the right wing? Do you see me defending Republicans. Do you see me attempting to force my religious viewpoints on anyone?

And further nonsense from you:

WOW! As a true conservative that shouldn't have been a step in evolving it should have been ingrained in your system. However, many conservatives seem to have issue with hypocrisy on the big government front. It's bad when they disagree with it but they appear to have no problem with it when they desire such interference.

You do realize don't you, that I was describing how I have evolved into what I believe to be a better human being. What do "many conservatives" have to do with this discussion?

Next response:

That's a good step however as long as the right uses big government to legitmize discrimination and get praised for doing so I will reseve the right to call them out for their hypocrisy.

Once again, do you see me praising big government? Why are you not intelligent enough to call out the left for doing the exact same thing?

You should call people out for legitimizing discrimination. Might be a damned good idea if you started with yourself.

Your entire argument is flawed based on your bias and intolerance of liberals.

Hehe, that is hilarious. I have a lot of friends on this site that are liberal. I'm not intolerant of their viewpoints at all. I am intolerant of the bigotry displayed by people such as yourself and Chris, rdean, TDM, William Joyce, bripat#### and a few others.

You have an idea that you believe is representative of all liberals and that applies to me when it doesn't.

It doesn't? Really? Have you ever made a post on this site that complemented or supported anything said by a conservative? Even one post?

You can simply answer yes or no and maybe you can name the conservative, but I don't believe you have.

So, I think I am right, you are a bigot.

Your friend,

Immie

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Let me help you out. He was quoting from the link you posted in the OP. And his response to it was spot on.

I know what he was quoting, but the way he quoted it actually violated copyright laws by not giving proper attribution. Being as he is a wannabe lawyer in grade school, he needs to avoid breaking the law in such obvious, if trivial, ways. It also totally missed the entire point of the blog I linked to, which means it was far from spot on.

The post was indeed spot on. QWB is indeed a blow bag, who violates general procedure as well as integrity when he posts. This poster is one of the least respected on the board for excellent reason.

Feel free to report my posts, it will give the mods a laugh.

 

[drsmith1072]

Bigotry comes in all shapes and sizes. It comes from all political and sociological aspects.

Look in the mirror. You will probably see a bigot, because quite frankly, bigotry is human nature. Some can and do control it within them, but we all have our prejudices.

When I was reading this post by drsmith:



I could not but help to think that the second definition he presented fits him to a "T". There are others on the board who are "obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices", but he most definitely fits the definition IMHO.

Funny but you don't even know me so how can you make such a judgement without it being based on your own bias and intolerance of those who dare disagree with you?



I have voted for a republicans in the past. Jack kingston comes to mind when I was stationed at HAAF in savannah, ga. I have civil conversations with civil conservatives all of the time. Maybe if the conservatives here were more civil things would change but most of what shows up here is the worst of the party.



Yes I know and like several. Some are even engaged in politics. gasp!



Based on the fact that I already do your assumptions aare nothing but your own bias and intolerance as you try to frame someone based on your own false assumptions about liberals. Kind of bigoted on your part.



funny you mention that since that is exactly what the author of this thread did in the op.



You are wrong but I doubt that you will have the integrity to admit it.



Already have and still doing so today. however, based on your own posts you are not and never truly will.



HUH? The same rightwing that argues against big government never fails to use big government to try to enforce their religious and moral beliefs through legislation. Although I do agree that women do not want the government to tell them what to do with their body it's interesting that the right has no qualms with using big government to do just that.



WOW! As a true conservative that shouldn't have been a step in evolving it should have been ingrained in your system. However, many conservatives seem to have issue with hypocrisy on the big government front. It's bad when they disagree with it but they appear to have no problem with it when they desire such interference.



That's a good step however as long as the right uses big government to legitmize discrimination and get praised for doing so I will reseve the right to call them out for their hypocrisy.



Your entire argument is flawed based on your bias and intolerance of liberals. You have an idea that you believe is representative of all liberals and that applies to me when it doesn't. Thanks for the spin.

Thank you for answering the question. I must tell you that I did not expect that.

You are wrong though, I do know you. I know you from your posts and you are in line with the other leftwing wackos on here who have never made a single post where they said a decent thing about a conservative.

This was my question:



This was your answer:



You didn't answer the question. Have your positions ever "evolved"?

The next question you answered. Thank you.

The next question, I should have put "If not," in front.

Your next answer proves you are not very intelligent. I have already discussed the OP. No reason for me to do so again. Here was your answer:



I was responding to your post because you have a history of bigotry on this site that is almost beyond compare.

Next question:



Next answer:



Since you didn't give any examples, can I ask did you evolve into being an asshole when you joined the site and are you hoping on changing back?

Next in regards to my example you came up with this, what I am certain you consider intelligent response. It makes no sense:



Do you see me defending the right wing? Do you see me defending Republicans. Do you see me attempting to force my religious viewpoints on anyone?

And further nonsense from you:



You do realize don't you, that I was describing how I have evolved into what I believe to be a better human being. What do "many conservatives" have to do with this discussion?

Next response:



Once again, do you see me praising big government? Why are you not intelligent enough to call out the left for doing the exact same thing?

You should call people out for legitimizing discrimination. Might be a damned good idea if you started with yourself.

Your entire argument is flawed based on your bias and intolerance of liberals.

Hehe, that is hilarious. I have a lot of friends on this site that are liberal. I'm not intolerant of their viewpoints at all. I am intolerant of the bigotry displayed by people such as yourself and Chris, rdean, TDM, William Joyce, bripat#### and a few others.

You have an idea that you believe is representative of all liberals and that applies to me when it doesn't.

It doesn't? Really? Have you ever made a post on this site that complemented or supported anything said by a conservative? Even one post?

You can simply answer yes or no and maybe you can name the conservative, but I don't believe you have.

So, I think I am right, you are a bigot.

Your friend,

Immie

well based on how you are obviously not interested in my responses and seem more interested in insulting me based solely on your preconceived notions about me there is no point is wasting my time responding to a hack who refuses to offer me the same courtesy.

Thanks for nothing hack.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So I was right about the head games.

All you've proved in this thread is that you might be worth disregarding in the future.

If, by head games, you mean I am pointing out how calling people bigots does not make them bigots

WHo has done that? Based on the definitons that I provided they are indeed bigots based on their actios and their positions. So as far as I can tell no one is merely calling them bigots without justification. Based on their own actions they define themselves as such.




When the core of the argument against it is that they need to protect the sanctity of marriage then yes the only explanation is a religious one. How many atheists fit your argument? got any real numbers or a reason why?

then I plead guilty to head games.

your "head games" are more along the lines of strawman arguments and providing only the definiton of "bigot" that fits your needs as you exclude all others.

If it makes you more comfortable to ignore me in the future so you don't have to deal with your own bigotry, feel free to do so.

If you actually want to grow, I suggest you pay attention to everyone, even the idiots, because I have seen everyone on this board have flashes of genius, even the asshole racists like Tank and Salt Jones.

says the poster who started this thread based on how you "dismiss everyone who disagrees with their <your> views" by calling them "small minded."

Funny, I don't ever recall trying to make the argument that there are not bigots that oppose same sex marriage. I am just pointing out that dismissing all opposition to same sex marriage as bigotry makes anyone who does it a bigot. That has resulted in some lame attempts to argue that people who support something cannot be bigots. You are the one that is trying to insist that the only definition of a bigot that applies is one that excludes you. I am quite willing to admit my bigotry, I have been dealing with it for years. The result of that is I am better able to learn from people who disagree with me.

By the way, the only people who disagree with my views on this subject are the ones that think that their side has no bigots. since I actually support same sex marriage as long as the government insists on recognizes it, and am even comfortable with the idea of expanding the government recognition to other areas. I would actually prefer eliminating all preferential tax treatment based on preferred behavior patterns, aka morality, but there are too many idiots, like you, that prefer to legislate their morality than make their own choices for me to believe that will happen.

Please, continue to try to demonstrate my bigotry by making assumptions about my position based on your own bigotry, this thread has actually given me some of the most fun of anything I ever posted on this forum.

 

[naturegirl]

People are people, some have strong opinions. Just as I feel about birth control and abortions, sexual orientation is different from person to person.

I think the government should stay out of everyone's bedrooms, Gay or Straight.

They have no business telling anyone what's acceptable and what's not. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, information creates a different mind set. Cramming something down someone's throat isn't going to change their opinion, providing them with factual information instead of strong opinions gives them the information they can use. They can also choose not to use it, it should be their choice, not the government's.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I know what he was quoting, but the way he quoted it actually violated copyright laws by not giving proper attribution. Being as he is a wannabe lawyer in grade school, he needs to avoid breaking the law in such obvious, if trivial, ways. It also totally missed the entire point of the blog I linked to, which means it was far from spot on.

The post was indeed spot on. QWB is indeed a blow bag, who violates general procedure as well as integrity when he posts. This poster is one of the least respected on the board for excellent reason.

Irony.

And what "general procedure" is violated when QW posts?

You don't make sense, compounded by lying, per usual.

You are despised of truth, so I worry not about you, little one.

QWB is your equal.

 

[koshergrl]

More irony.

And I don't recall ever hearing QW tell a lie, about himself or someone else.

You, however....

 

[drsmith1072]

If, by head games, you mean I am pointing out how calling people bigots does not make them bigots

WHo has done that? Based on the definitons that I provided they are indeed bigots based on their actios and their positions. So as far as I can tell no one is merely calling them bigots without justification. Based on their own actions they define themselves as such.




When the core of the argument against it is that they need to protect the sanctity of marriage then yes the only explanation is a religious one. How many atheists fit your argument? got any real numbers or a reason why?



your "head games" are more along the lines of strawman arguments and providing only the definiton of "bigot" that fits your needs as you exclude all others.

If it makes you more comfortable to ignore me in the future so you don't have to deal with your own bigotry, feel free to do so.

If you actually want to grow, I suggest you pay attention to everyone, even the idiots, because I have seen everyone on this board have flashes of genius, even the asshole racists like Tank and Salt Jones.

says the poster who started this thread based on how you "dismiss everyone who disagrees with their <your> views" by calling them "small minded."

Funny, I don't ever recall trying to make the argument that there are not bigots that oppose same sex marriage.

And i quote

I suggest that everyone who thinks that the bigots are the people that vote against same sex marriage are small minded read the whole thing.

In that phrase alone you are declaring that the "bigots" are nopt the people against same sex marriage and that those who think so are "small minded." Maybe you meant to say something else but the content of your post is quite clear.

Then you go on to try to argue that those who believe bigots are against same sex marriage are bigots themselves based on your chosen defintion of "bigot."

Next time somebody wants to dismiss everyone who disagrees with their views about same sex marriage as a bigot they should remember what the word actually means and take a step to end the intolerance.


Bigot [big-uht] (noun) a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

I am just pointing out that dismissing all opposition to same sex marriage as bigotry makes anyone who does it a bigot.

there in lies the flaw in your argument. Pointing out bigotry does not make one a bigot. Engaging in acts that show how you are intolerant of others is bigotry. A person asking to be treated equally in the face of bigotry is not a bigot.

That has resulted in some lame attempts to argue that people who support something cannot be bigots.

Really? anyone can be a bigot but your definition and interpretation is hardly the end all and be all interpretation.

You are the one that is trying to insist that the only definition of a bigot that applies is one that excludes you.

I am?? Really? Where?

I am quite willing to admit my bigotry, I have been dealing with it for years. The result of that is I am better able to learn from people who disagree with me.

well good for you if true but based on what and how you write it seems that you still have a long way to go.

By the way, the only people who disagree with my views on this subject are the ones that think that their side has no bigots.

really?? I disagree with you and I don't doubt that my side has bigots. Now where does that leave your all enveloping argument?

since I actually support same sex marriage as long as the government insists on recognizes it, and am even comfortable with the idea of expanding the government recognition to other areas. I would actually prefer eliminating all preferential tax treatment based on preferred behavior patterns, aka morality, but there are too many idiots, like you, that prefer to legislate their morality than make their own choices for me to believe that will happen.

An all or nothing approach is interesting and would be a good thing but as soon as you try that there are those that will argue that you are trying to distroy the sanctity of marriage or violating their freedom of religion even though many have argued that it doesn't apply to same sex marriage.

Please, continue to try to demonstrate my bigotry by making assumptions about my position based on your own bigotry,

HUH?? your "bigotry" or intolerance of others is evident in your OP when you choose "to dismiss everyone who disagrees with" your position as you declare that they are small minded for disagreeing with you.

this thread has actually given me some of the most fun of anything I ever posted on this forum.

I am certian that based on your delusions and failure to recognize the difference between bigotry and pointing it out even as you fail to address your own intolerance of those who disagree with you that you are having "fun." No matter how much others are laughing at you.

BTW, what is really funny is that I asked you a few simple questions about your own statements and you couldn't even bother to answer them. Imagine that.

 

[francoHFW]

Those who hate , discriminate against, and support policies that do the same to, minorities like blacks, hispanics, gays, foreigners, women, etc. IE the GOP- if you don't believe, ask those minorities. Change the channel and think, dupes. God will not be amused by willful ignorance and arrogance.

 

[JakeStarkey]

More irony. And I don't recall ever hearing QW tell a lie, about himself or someone else. You, however....

You and truth telling are not buddies.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

In that phrase alone you are declaring that the "bigots" are nopt the people against same sex marriage and that those who think so are "small minded." Maybe you meant to say something else but the content of your post is quite clear.

Then you go on to try to argue that those who believe bigots are against same sex marriage are bigots themselves based on your chosen defintion of "bigot."

Apparently your understanding of English is about as solid as your understanding of politics. Since you are obviously so much smarter than me, and everyone else, why don't you explain how dismissing an entire state as bigots because they voted against same sex marriage isn't small minded. Before you try go back and actually read the blog I linked to where an outspoken gay man who lives in North Carlina is offended by the idiots, like you, who do this because he is actually friends with some of those people, and knows that they are not making that decision based on bigotry. Or would doing so actually expose your belief system to facts that conflicting information that would cause you to short circuit if you tried to consider it?

there in lies the flaw in your argument. Pointing out bigotry does not make one a bigot. Engaging in acts that show how you are intolerant of others is bigotry. A person asking to be treated equally in the face of bigotry is not a bigot.

How is that a flaw in my argument? Did I say that people who want equal treatment are bigots? No, what I said is that people who refuse to change their beliefs when presented with factual evidence that contradicts it are bigots. I can point to people on the right in this thread who are being bigots without a bit of a problem. I can also point to people on the left who are being bigots, one of them is you because you refuse to admit that it is actually possible to vote against something you like unless the person doing it is a bigot even when gay man steps up to point out they aren't.

Why does that offend you?

Really? anyone can be a bigot but your definition and interpretation is hardly the end all and be all interpretation.

Didn't say it was. If I actually believed the claptrap you keep trying to say I do I wouldn't have admitted I am a bigot, would I?

well good for you if true but based on what and how you write it seems that you still have a long way to go.

Maybe,m but not nearly as far as you do, and certainly not in the way you mean.

really?? I disagree with you and I don't doubt that my side has bigots. Now where does that leave your all enveloping argument? [/qipte]

The problem here is not that your side has bigots you refuse to see, the problem here is that you personally are the bigot. This can easily be demonstrated by the fact that despite the fact that I have clearly demonstrated that I actually support same sex marriage you are still insisting that I am the one that needs to adjust my attitude because it does not fall into line with what you believe.

An all or nothing approach is interesting and would be a good thing but as soon as you try that there are those that will argue that you are trying to distroy the sanctity of marriage or violating their freedom of religion even though many have argued that it doesn't apply to same sex marriage.

So?

HUH?? your "bigotry" or intolerance of others is evident in your OP when you choose "to dismiss everyone who disagrees with" your position as you declare that they are small minded for disagreeing with you.

Here is everything I said in the OP

I came across this blog earlier today, and it got me to thinking about bigotry. I suggest that everyone who thinks that the bigots are the people that vote against same sex marriage are small minded read the whole thing.

Next time somebody wants to dismiss everyone who disagrees with their views about same sex marriage as a bigot they should remember what the word actually means and take a step to end the intolerance.

I am not dismissing everyone who disagrees with me, all I am doing is pointing out that the people who dismiss everyone who disagrees with them as a bigot is showing a high degree of intolerance and bigotry. for some obscure reason that offends you.

That sounds like a personal problem to me.

I am certian that based on your delusions and failure to recognize the difference between bigotry and pointing it out even as you fail to address your own intolerance of those who disagree with you that you are having "fun." No matter how much others are laughing at you.

BTW, what is really funny is that I asked you a few simple questions about your own statements and you couldn't even bother to answer them. Imagine that.

Once again, what was it about my OP that was intolerant? How is suggesting that people examine their own motives a bad thing? Does a call for people to think about the opposite viewpoint only count if the person asking you to do that agree with you? The fact that you are reacting emotionally to this subject indicates that you are the one with the problem. I refuse to let your negative emotions affect me, I intend to continue to enjoy myself.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Those who hate , discriminate against, and support policies that do the same to, minorities like blacks, hispanics, gays, foreigners, women, etc. IE the GOP- if you don't believe, ask those minorities. Change the channel and think, dupes. God will not be amused by willful ignorance and arrogance.

You oppose policies that discriminate against minorities? Would that include a policy that deliberately makes them less capable than other groups? Do you oppose affirmative action?

 

[JakeStarkey]

"I am not dismissing everyone who disagrees with me, all I am doing is pointing out that the people who dismiss everyone who disagrees with them as a bigot is showing a high degree of intolerance and bigotry."

Live the words, or metaphorically die by them.

 

[Immanuel]

Funny but you don't even know me so how can you make such a judgement without it being based on your own bias and intolerance of those who dare disagree with you?



I have voted for a republicans in the past. Jack kingston comes to mind when I was stationed at HAAF in savannah, ga. I have civil conversations with civil conservatives all of the time. Maybe if the conservatives here were more civil things would change but most of what shows up here is the worst of the party.



Yes I know and like several. Some are even engaged in politics. gasp!



Based on the fact that I already do your assumptions aare nothing but your own bias and intolerance as you try to frame someone based on your own false assumptions about liberals. Kind of bigoted on your part.



funny you mention that since that is exactly what the author of this thread did in the op.



You are wrong but I doubt that you will have the integrity to admit it.



Already have and still doing so today. however, based on your own posts you are not and never truly will.



HUH? The same rightwing that argues against big government never fails to use big government to try to enforce their religious and moral beliefs through legislation. Although I do agree that women do not want the government to tell them what to do with their body it's interesting that the right has no qualms with using big government to do just that.



WOW! As a true conservative that shouldn't have been a step in evolving it should have been ingrained in your system. However, many conservatives seem to have issue with hypocrisy on the big government front. It's bad when they disagree with it but they appear to have no problem with it when they desire such interference.



That's a good step however as long as the right uses big government to legitmize discrimination and get praised for doing so I will reseve the right to call them out for their hypocrisy.



Your entire argument is flawed based on your bias and intolerance of liberals. You have an idea that you believe is representative of all liberals and that applies to me when it doesn't. Thanks for the spin.

Thank you for answering the question. I must tell you that I did not expect that.

You are wrong though, I do know you. I know you from your posts and you are in line with the other leftwing wackos on here who have never made a single post where they said a decent thing about a conservative.

This was my question:



This was your answer:



You didn't answer the question. Have your positions ever "evolved"?

The next question you answered. Thank you.

The next question, I should have put "If not," in front.

Your next answer proves you are not very intelligent. I have already discussed the OP. No reason for me to do so again. Here was your answer:



I was responding to your post because you have a history of bigotry on this site that is almost beyond compare.

Next question:



Next answer:



Since you didn't give any examples, can I ask did you evolve into being an asshole when you joined the site and are you hoping on changing back?

Next in regards to my example you came up with this, what I am certain you consider intelligent response. It makes no sense:



Do you see me defending the right wing? Do you see me defending Republicans. Do you see me attempting to force my religious viewpoints on anyone?

And further nonsense from you:



You do realize don't you, that I was describing how I have evolved into what I believe to be a better human being. What do "many conservatives" have to do with this discussion?

Next response:



Once again, do you see me praising big government? Why are you not intelligent enough to call out the left for doing the exact same thing?

You should call people out for legitimizing discrimination. Might be a damned good idea if you started with yourself.



Hehe, that is hilarious. I have a lot of friends on this site that are liberal. I'm not intolerant of their viewpoints at all. I am intolerant of the bigotry displayed by people such as yourself and Chris, rdean, TDM, William Joyce, bripat#### and a few others.

You have an idea that you believe is representative of all liberals and that applies to me when it doesn't.

It doesn't? Really? Have you ever made a post on this site that complemented or supported anything said by a conservative? Even one post?

You can simply answer yes or no and maybe you can name the conservative, but I don't believe you have.

So, I think I am right, you are a bigot.

Your friend,

Immie

well based on how you are obviously not interested in my responses and seem more interested in insulting me based solely on your preconceived notions about me there is no point is wasting my time responding to a hack who refuses to offer me the same courtesy.

Thanks for nothing hack.

I asked you perfectly honest questions and gave you a perfectly easy way to state that you are not the bigot you come across as. I was kind of hoping you would take the opportunity. But, you replied with bullshit bigotry. I should have known you would.

You didn't even read my reply.

It is obvious who is the bigot and that would be you. And quite frankly, I would prefer to be a hack than a discriminating bigot.

Sianora, bigot.

Immie