Who is more intolerant of political opponents the "left" or "the right"

[Mortimer]

The right wingers here accuse the "liberals" to be intolerant of political opponents, but are they any better?

 

[Godboy]

The right wingers here accuse the "liberals" to be intolerant of political opponents, but are they any better?

Got any videos of mobs of republicans attacking innocent democrats? I can provide MANY of the opposite. I win.

 

[emilynghiem]

The right wingers here accuse the "liberals" to be intolerant of political opponents, but are they any better?

I'd say the rightwing have the advantage of invoking either Christian authority by scriptural laws
and/or Constitutional authority by natural laws and Constitutional principles,
so they are better at giving and accepting rebukes correction by these standards and process.

The leftwing depends on political party to push through media or govt.
So anything that threatens that collective influence or image is rejected.

As a progressive Green Democrat, I have more trouble working with fellow liberals
who are conditioned to depend on party and govt, and not empowered to take on equal responsibility for
funding and managing social agenda directly.

I have an easier time resolving differences in beliefs with Christians and Constitutionalists
who put universal principles first, before party representation, and those tend to be on the right not the left.
And still, I have an easier time defending prochoice principles with the right
while the left contradicts themselves.

When I point out contradictions to the rightwing about discirminating against Muslims,
they do better at understanding and receiving corrections.

But when I point out contradictions to the leftwing about imposing beliefs
about health care and marriage that violate "separate of church and state"
all I get is more justifications why this is necessary for equality.

They generally don't acknowledge their own beliefs on the same level
as a political religion, and believe they have the right to impose their beliefs by majority rule
as "rights" they don't see as "beliefs". And complain when rightwing do the same,
and take what they see as truth and impose that through govt when it constitutes "beliefs."
The rightwing are more understanding when I explain this in Constitutional terms.

The leftwing are not taught or empowered to enforce natural laws and rights directly by following and exercising them,
so they have defined their rights and agenda based on political force by party.

Only recently, when this system was slapped down with a huge loss in the national elections, have I seen receptiveness to the idea of self-govt instead of depending on party.

 

[Clementine]

The right wingers here accuse the "liberals" to be intolerant of political opponents, but are they any better?

Disagreeing is not intolerance. Bullying and beating people for not agreeing is intolerance. Look at the people in the streets destroying property, looting, attacking people and blocking highways. None of that is freedom of speech. None of that is conducive to rational discussion. It is sheer intolerance and a violent reaction toward those who don't go along with them.

I would say those on the right are more apt to explain themselves and do so in a non-violent way. Certain people do find certain things intolerable. For instance, many don't tolerate anything that is harmful to society. Gangs, drug dealers, terrorists, murderers, and rapists are good examples. The right tends to hold people responsible for their actions and have no tolerance for such dangerous people. The left seems to ignore the individual responsibility and they find the 2nd amendment intolerable. They not only blame guns, but also blame all the people who support the 2nd amendment even though they have never even broken the law, let alone hurt anyone. The target of their anger are those who disagree, not those who commit heinous crimes. Opposition is not tolerated and is treated as a worse offense than the above. Much more criticism is reserved for those supporting right guns than those actually posing a threat to society.

While the right refuses to tolerate criminals, the left refuses to tolerate anyone supporting the 2nd amendment. The intent of criminals or terrorists have become a taboo subject and the conversation always goes back to guns. When attacks occur with knives or other weapons, the left yawns.

I think the reason the left isn't calling for more regulations on bomb making materials or knives is because those things don't affect their grand plan to fundamentally change America. When politicians and media focus only on those things required by politicians to push their agenda, the supporters go along. It's difficult, at best, to engage a liberal on the need for border security, vetting refugees, and some of the dangerous practices of radical Muslims. There is no discussion on the gang problem or the rampant violence in Chicago, despite it's stricter gun laws.

Attempts to discuss these things brings about a lot of anger from liberals. Any conservative who spent the holiday with liberal relatives probably knew better than to bring up politics or they might have wound up getting clobbered with a turkey leg while being called names. Every family gathering, the Republicans are always warned not to bring up anything political. It sets the liberals off and there's always a scene. Never rational discussion, just initial eye rolling which is soon followed by nasty insults.

 

[cnm]

The leftwing are not taught or empowered to enforce natural laws and rights directly by following and exercising them,
so they have defined their rights and agenda based on political force by party.

Any one able to make sense of the mass of assumptions and contradictions in that post?

 

[Godboy]

The leftwing are not taught or empowered to enforce natural laws and rights directly by following and exercising them,
so they have defined their rights and agenda based on political force by party.

Any one able to make sense of the mass of assumptions and contradictions in that post?

Anyone with a brain and an ounce of honesty can make sense of her post.

 

[cnm]

The complete ambiguity of natural law phases Emily not at all. Morals are community norms, the validity of which are demonstrated by the survival of the community. Of course norms are as varied as communities, which means 'natural law' is not 'natural' but subjective.

Natural Law
Natural Law | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

According to natural law legal theory, the authority of legal standards necessarily derives, at least in part, from considerations having to do with the moral merit of those standards.​

 

[cnm]

Anyone with a brain and an ounce of honesty can make sense of her post.

'Natural law'? What a load. As ludicrous as the rest of it.

 

[Godboy]

Anyone with a brain and an ounce of honesty can make sense of her post.

'Natural law'? What a load. As ludicrous as the rest of it.

You said her "post"; not a hand picked sentence from her post.

 

[cnm]

You said her "post"; not a hand picked sentence from her post.

Gods. Did you read her post? Or mine? If you did read them, did you manage to comprehend them?

Like what do you think 'As ludicrous as the rest of it' means?

 

[Blackrook]

I consider myself a very tolerant individual.

I would never deny a job to a person because I learned he or she was a liberal or a Democrat.

I know, however, that liberals and Democrats often use their power to discriminate against conservatives and Republicans in their hiring decisions.

 

[Eloy]

The leftwing are not taught or empowered to enforce natural laws and rights directly by following and exercising them,
so they have defined their rights and agenda based on political force by party.

Any one able to make sense of the mass of assumptions and contradictions in that post?

Anyone with a brain and an ounce of honesty can make sense of her post.

Your post demonstrates a difference between right wing posts and others.
cnm asked if anyone could make sense the content in the post of EMILYNGHIEM and you attacked cnm by implying that he was intellectually deficient. Attacking the person rather than what he says is characteristic of the Right.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

The right wingers here accuse the "liberals" to be intolerant of political opponents, but are they any better?

dont know if they are any better or more tolerant but they do portray themselves in a more dignified manner for the most part.
just look at the name calling that the left does. Yes there are some on the right that also engage in this 1st grade level debate style, but it is mostly the left.
I think Im tolerent, I understand why the left might want things like the ACA where one person pays someone elses medical insurance, or a free phone, or free house or free education or free transportation or even to be paid 15 an hour for a .75 cent an hour job. (sweeping a floor maybe?)
I understand it all, but the left has a hard time understanding why I might rather use my money to support my own family instead of having my money taken from me and redistributed to these free programs, or why I might not want to pay 25 bucks for a number 1 meal (super sized) at McDonalds.
I understand how they might like what obama is trying to do in certain areas, but when I suggest that it might not be good, or I totally disagree, the only reason is that I have to be racist and if a white man would have suggested the same thing, I would have loved the idea and argued for it,.

 

[Godboy]

The leftwing are not taught or empowered to enforce natural laws and rights directly by following and exercising them,
so they have defined their rights and agenda based on political force by party.

Any one able to make sense of the mass of assumptions and contradictions in that post?

Anyone with a brain and an ounce of honesty can make sense of her post.

Your post demonstrates a difference between right wing posts and others.
cnm asked if anyone could make sense the content in the post of EMILYNGHIEM and you attacked cnm by implying that he was intellectually deficient. Attacking the person rather than what he says is characteristic of the Right.

Have you not heard any democrats speak on this board? "Intellectually deficient" doesnt come close to the insults hurled our direction, and for the record, cnm was implying the exact same thing about emily, so you can just settle down with your obvious bias.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

The leftwing are not taught or empowered to enforce natural laws and rights directly by following and exercising them,
so they have defined their rights and agenda based on political force by party.

Any one able to make sense of the mass of assumptions and contradictions in that post?

Anyone with a brain and an ounce of honesty can make sense of her post.

Your post demonstrates a difference between right wing posts and others.
cnm asked if anyone could make sense the content in the post of EMILYNGHIEM and you attacked cnm by implying that he was intellectually deficient. Attacking the person rather than what he says is characteristic of the Right.

I disagree, at least on this forum, the left is constantly trying to suggest that those on the right have less education than those on the left.
Interesting observation though, you as a (Im assuming) supporter of the left see it as the right exerting or suggesting intellectual superiority, we, or at least I on the right see it the opposite way.
maybe we just discount what someone is going to say before we read it because we know they are liberal or conservative and assume that we are not going to agree.

 

[Godboy]

You said her "post"; not a hand picked sentence from her post.

Gods. Did you read her post? Or mine? If you did read them, did you manage to comprehend them?

Like what do you think 'As ludicrous as the rest of it' means?

All you did was say "her post makes no sense", but you have yet to present an argument to defeat her post. .

 

[Eloy]

The leftwing are not taught or empowered to enforce natural laws and rights directly by following and exercising them,
so they have defined their rights and agenda based on political force by party.

Any one able to make sense of the mass of assumptions and contradictions in that post?

Anyone with a brain and an ounce of honesty can make sense of her post.

Your post demonstrates a difference between right wing posts and others.
cnm asked if anyone could make sense the content in the post of EMILYNGHIEM and you attacked cnm by implying that he was intellectually deficient. Attacking the person rather than what he says is characteristic of the Right.

Have you not heard any democrats speak on this board? "Intellectually deficient" doesnt come close to the insults hurled our direction, and for the record, cnm was implying the exact same thing about emily, so you can just settle down with your obvious bias.

You proved once again what I wrote is true.

 

[Godboy]

The leftwing are not taught or empowered to enforce natural laws and rights directly by following and exercising them,
so they have defined their rights and agenda based on political force by party.

Any one able to make sense of the mass of assumptions and contradictions in that post?

Anyone with a brain and an ounce of honesty can make sense of her post.

Your post demonstrates a difference between right wing posts and others.
cnm asked if anyone could make sense the content in the post of EMILYNGHIEM and you attacked cnm by implying that he was intellectually deficient. Attacking the person rather than what he says is characteristic of the Right.

Have you not heard any democrats speak on this board? "Intellectually deficient" doesnt come close to the insults hurled our direction, and for the record, cnm was implying the exact same thing about emily, so you can just settle down with your obvious bias.

You proved once again what I wrote is true.

As did you.

 

[Eloy]

The leftwing are not taught or empowered to enforce natural laws and rights directly by following and exercising them,
so they have defined their rights and agenda based on political force by party.

Any one able to make sense of the mass of assumptions and contradictions in that post?

Anyone with a brain and an ounce of honesty can make sense of her post.

Your post demonstrates a difference between right wing posts and others.
cnm asked if anyone could make sense the content in the post of EMILYNGHIEM and you attacked cnm by implying that he was intellectually deficient. Attacking the person rather than what he says is characteristic of the Right.

I disagree, at least on this forum, the left is constantly trying to suggest that those on the right have less education than those on the left.
Interesting observation though, you as a (Im assuming) supporter of the left see it as the right exerting or suggesting intellectual superiority, we, or at least I on the right see it the opposite way.
maybe we just discount what someone is going to say before we read it because we know they are liberal or conservative and assume that we are not going to agree.

I am prepared to believe this.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

The leftwing are not taught or empowered to enforce natural laws and rights directly by following and exercising them,
so they have defined their rights and agenda based on political force by party.

Any one able to make sense of the mass of assumptions and contradictions in that post?

Anyone with a brain and an ounce of honesty can make sense of her post.

Your post demonstrates a difference between right wing posts and others.
cnm asked if anyone could make sense the content in the post of EMILYNGHIEM and you attacked cnm by implying that he was intellectually deficient. Attacking the person rather than what he says is characteristic of the Right.

I disagree, at least on this forum, the left is constantly trying to suggest that those on the right have less education than those on the left.
Interesting observation though, you as a (Im assuming) supporter of the left see it as the right exerting or suggesting intellectual superiority, we, or at least I on the right see it the opposite way.
maybe we just discount what someone is going to say before we read it because we know they are liberal or conservative and assume that we are not going to agree.

I am prepared to believe this.

thats because you are an idiot..

Sorry, I didnt mean that, I just couldn't resist considering the topic and tone of the conversation. You have honestly given me no reason to question your intelligence.