In Politics and Society: Is it Intolerant to be Intolerant of Intolerance?

[TemplarKormac]

By the way CC, since when did this all of a sudden become a question of Fox's character? Is it just me or has this been the common theme with other liberals in this thread? Attack the messenger, not the message? Is that it? How uncouth and childish.

 

[The T]

So, it was nycarbineer's hyperbole?

Yep. You got it my friend. Carbine is blowing Fox's words completely out of proportion, trying to smear her and her character in the process. Such is an act of cowardice. Unconscionable.

He has not performed well in this thread. He's been overly emotional and sometimes incoherent for most of the past two days. It's been sad to watch as he tries again and again to derail the conversation. Perhaps I'll give him a break and let him rest on the sidelines for now.

Sometimes it's better part of valor to not give Carbonated such power to begin with and ignore his ignorance by not responding.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So, it was nycarbineer's hyperbole?

Yep. You got it my friend. Carbine is blowing Fox's words completely out of proportion, trying to smear her and her character in the process. Such is an act of cowardice. Unconscionable.

He has not performed well in this thread. He's been overly emotional and sometimes incoherent for most of the past two days. It's been sad to watch as he tries again and again to derail the conversation. Perhaps I'll give him a break and let him rest on the sidelines for now.

Precisely!

 

[TemplarKormac]

Yep. You got it my friend. Carbine is blowing Fox's words completely out of proportion, trying to smear her and her character in the process. Such is an act of cowardice. Unconscionable.

He has not performed well in this thread. He's been overly emotional and sometimes incoherent for most of the past two days. It's been sad to watch as he tries again and again to derail the conversation. Perhaps I'll give him a break and let him rest on the sidelines for now.

Sometimes it's better part of valor to not give Carbonated such power to begin with and ignore his ignorance by not responding.

Actually, T, Fox felt the need to respond, since carbine is making unfounded assumptions an accusations about her. I would do the same in her shoes. You should never allow someone to make unbased assumptions or prevarications about you without having to answer for it.

Perhaps she should be the exception to that rule.

 

[The T]

He has not performed well in this thread. He's been overly emotional and sometimes incoherent for most of the past two days. It's been sad to watch as he tries again and again to derail the conversation. Perhaps I'll give him a break and let him rest on the sidelines for now.

Sometimes it's better part of valor to not give Carbonated such power to begin with and ignore his ignorance by not responding.

Actually, T, Fox felt the need to respond, since carbine is making unfounded assumptions an accusations about her. I would do the same in her shoes. You should never allow someone to make unbased assumptions or prevarications about you without having to answer for it.

Perhaps she should be the exception to that rule.

Since it's Foxy's thread, as a matter of course? I agree to that. As for me? I gave up on him long ago...Carbonated being entrenched in leftist liberty hating lunacy and all. There's no convincing those that have bought their ticket on the Statist bus that it's a trip they shouldn't take when they're so invested in it. REASON is something they never learned, and think they're using when it's their way or the highway.

 

[ClosedCaption]

He DOES however have an unalienable right to express his religious or any other views without having some angry mob or organized group go after him to punish him, hurt him, harm him, destroy him. Just as they have a right to express their contempt for any of his religious or other views without having some angry mob or organized group go after them to punish them, hurt them, harm them, destroy them.

Too many here--people I actually like, enjoy and admire--seem unable to grasp that simple concept. Tolerance is NOT agreement, endorsement, acceptance, or anything of that nature. Tolerance IS allowing the other person, however disagreeable, to be who or what he/she is so long as s/he is not infringing on the rights of others.

Phil Robertson's expressed opinions whenever, whatever, wherever, just as one example, are one man's opinion. Phil isn't running for political office. He is not calling for retribution or action against anybody. He has no power or intent or motive whatsoever to harm anybody, including gay and lesbian people, purely by stating what he believes.

To attempt to physically or materially harm him (or anybody else) for no reason other than he said something somebody disagrees with is evil.

Phil Robertson has no power? Are you mad? He has thousands now threatening to boycott A & E if they don't keep his show on?

Yes, threatening to physically harm A & E for wanting to decide what their own programming will be -

something you deem criminal.

I am on the record that A&E has every right to make whatever business decisions they wish to make that does not infringe on somebody's unalienable rights. There is no unalienable right to have a program on A&E.

It is absolutely my right to inform A&E, should I choose to do so, that I am strongly disappointed in their business decision and that it makes A&E much less appealing to me. That is how I show support for those I believe to be worthy of support. And Duck Dynasty, even though I personally rarely ever watch the show, definitely is one of the truly good programs on television. We need a whole lot more wholesome programming of that nature on television. It is absolutely my right to inform A&E of my opinion about that.

My expressed opinion would be to inform them of what I do or do not want as their customer. It would not be for the purpose of harming or destroying A&E because they did something I didn't like. And any producer worth his/her salt welcomes that kind of input so they will know what their public wants.

I imagine you won't be able to see the distinction here either as you so far have not expressed any understanding of the concept of the thread. But I have been impressed that there are several posting who do understand the concept of the thread.

Nor have I used the word 'criminal' in this context.

So you would tell them what you want but if they decided to ignore your requests you wouldnt stop watching because that would harm A&E?

This double talk has to stop. If you inform them what you want and they dont do it you'll keep patronizing them out of fairness? Just because?

 

[ClosedCaption]

So does this^

By your use of the words "so does" it indicates that my words mean nothing either except Fox received thanks for saying nothing.

I was merely pointing out that if you dont accept intolerance then she believes that is intolerance. Basically there is no right or wrong because if you take a side you yourself are showing a negative trait which is intolerance.

So you cant judge, you cant express disagreement...basically its a PC mexican standoff and its bullshit.

Agree?

You know you're a paranoid liberal when:

A three word response from a conservative provokes you to write an essay in disagreement.

So thats a yes or a slippery non answer because you cant answer?

 

[Foxfyre]

He [Robertson] has no power or intent or motive whatsoever to harm anybody, including gay and lesbian people, purely by stating what he believes.

To attempt to physically or materially harm him (or anybody else) for no reason other than he said something somebody disagrees with is evil.

That is true, and his cable network is going to regret their decision to put him on hiatus until it has all blown over. Nothing will ever be the same, if and when, he returns for new episodes. The internal damage has been done. The Robertson's are a proud family.

I don't know. If A&E does decide to blow off GLAAD and reinstate Phil, I think the good press they would get from a lot of us would pretty well smooth out the damage done. And I believe the Robertsons would forgive and forget because I think it is their nature to do so. From what I've read, Duck Dynasty's contract with A&E will not allow them to set up shop somewhere else right away; however, A&E already has a full season of Duck Dynasty, Phil included, in the can now so the program will almost certainly run for quite awhile longer.

But again, as I have said, before, A&E has every right to make whatever business decisions they see as being in their best interest. I do not fault them for that.

My only quarrel is in an organized and well funded and powerful activist group demanding that Phil Robertson be physically and/or materially harmed for no reason other than that he expressed an opinion that they didn't like. That is intolerance to the level of being evil.

If GLAAD truly felt they had been defamed, wouldn't it have been more logical to protest GQ Magazine publishing the intereview? But GQ is pro-gay and very liberal and therefore a 'friend' to organizations like GLAAD. So GLAAD was not the least bit concerned about 'defamation'. They had the power to hurt somebody for no better reason than they didn't like an opinion somebody expressed. And they used it. And that is evil no matter who gets targeted no matter what race, religion, ethnicity, or sociopolitical affiliation.

 

[ClosedCaption]

By the way CC, since when did this all of a sudden become a question of Fox's character? Is it just me or has this been the common theme with other liberals in this thread? Attack the messenger, not the message? Is that it? How uncouth and childish.

Whos character?

You're making this about people I'm talking events.

 

[TemplarKormac]

By your use of the words "so does" it indicates that my words mean nothing either except Fox received thanks for saying nothing.

I was merely pointing out that if you dont accept intolerance then she believes that is intolerance. Basically there is no right or wrong because if you take a side you yourself are showing a negative trait which is intolerance.

So you cant judge, you cant express disagreement...basically its a PC mexican standoff and its bullshit.

Agree?

You know you're a paranoid liberal when:

A three word response from a conservative provokes you to write an essay in disagreement.

So thats a yes or a slippery non answer because you cant answer?

It's because I refuse to take trolls like you seriously.

 

[TemplarKormac]

By the way CC, since when did this all of a sudden become a question of Fox's character? Is it just me or has this been the common theme with other liberals in this thread? Attack the messenger, not the message? Is that it? How uncouth and childish.

Whos character?

You're making this about people I'm talking events.

By essentially working to disprove and/or contradict everything she says, you are implying that she's a liar, or she said something that she didn't say. If that isn't an attack on character, I don't know what is.

 

[ClosedCaption]

You know you're a paranoid liberal when:

A three word response from a conservative provokes you to write an essay in disagreement.

So thats a yes or a slippery non answer because you cant answer?

It's because I refuse to take trolls like you seriously.

So now you're doing the girl thing where you dont like me so that clouds your judgement about everything I say.

You're so upset that if I said the sky was blue you'd say I was abusing you

 

[Foxfyre]

Not to worry guys. I long ago made a pledge to myself to not feed the trolls, argue with idiots, or engage myself in exercises of futility.

Several have failed to grasp the context of the thread topic. Perhaps this is on purpose. Perhaps they simply are not capable of grasping a subject that complex. Who knows?

But, they do give the rest of us an excellent opportunity to point out the intolerance they seem to embrace and keep restating the principles of what true tolerance is. I imagine we've been able to persuade a few folks to think about it in a more constructive way--at least think about it. Who knows? Maybe we will start a whole new common sense trend?

I also believe that if I am not able to defend my own beliefs and convictions, that they aren't much worth having are they. So I never mind anybody who challenges my point of view. So long as they challenge what I say and not what they want me to have said. And as long as they stay on topic and not what they want the topic to be.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So thats a yes or a slippery non answer because you cant answer?

It's because I refuse to take trolls like you seriously.

So now you're doing the girl thing where you dont like me so that clouds your judgement about everything I say.

You're so upset that if I said the sky was blue you'd say I was abusing you

Sigh. If I said the sky was blue, you'd label me a racist homophobe without a second thought. You want to play this game? Sure.

Aren't you being sexist? "Doing the girl thing"?

 

[TemplarKormac]

 

[The T]

He [Robertson] has no power or intent or motive whatsoever to harm anybody, including gay and lesbian people, purely by stating what he believes.

To attempt to physically or materially harm him (or anybody else) for no reason other than he said something somebody disagrees with is evil.

That is true, and his cable network is going to regret their decision to put him on hiatus until it has all blown over. Nothing will ever be the same, if and when, he returns for new episodes. The internal damage has been done. The Robertson's are a proud family.

I don't know. If A&E does decide to blow off GLAAD and reinstate Phil, I think the good press they would get from a lot of us would pretty well smooth out the damage done. And I believe the Robertsons would forgive and forget because I think it is their nature to do so. From what I've read, Duck Dynasty's contract with A&E will not allow them to set up shop somewhere else right away; however, A&E already has a full season of Duck Dynasty, Phil included, in the can now so the program will almost certainly run for quite awhile longer.

But again, as I have said, before, A&E has every right to make whatever business decisions they see as being in their best interest. I do not fault them for that.

My only quarrel is in an organized and well funded and powerful activist group demanding that Phil Robertson be physically and/or materially harmed for no reason other than that he expressed an opinion that they didn't like. That is intolerance to the level of being evil.

If GLAAD truly felt they had been defamed, wouldn't it have been more logical to protest GQ Magazine publishing the intereview? But GQ is pro-gay and very liberal and therefore a 'friend' to organizations like GLAAD. So GLAAD was not the least bit concerned about 'defamation'. They had the power to hurt somebody for no better reason than they didn't like an opinion somebody expressed. And they used it. And that is evil no matter who gets targeted no matter what race, religion, ethnicity, or sociopolitical affiliation.

Sad that quoting the Bible, morals that you have been raised in and this Republic was Founded upon, and protected BY LAW[speech, and tolerating opposing speech], is considered HATE.

WE are better than this as a people. History has borne this out. Too many wish to destroy the very premise, and what you've done Foxy by this thread, is highlight it.

~KUDOS.

 

[bendog]

Personally, I took Phil's comment to be more bizarre (in keeping with his entire life) than hateful or intolerant. The entire Robinson schtick is based on the premise of it's ok to be different. A&E has a right to be concerned about its advertising base, but if I were to bet, I'd bet this was more a flap (hah) that will vanish into thin air.

However, as to the OP, I'd merely note (with respect) that anyone who acts with intolerance towards another's presonal lifestyle has no reason to expect any tolerance from those whom he/she has intentionally offended? Jesus opined on turning the other cheek, but he also kicked out the money lenders from the Temple because he was offended.

 

[Foxfyre]

Once again asking that we keep this civil and stop the sniping at each other and personal insults. I know it is difficult not to respond to an insulting troll, but try guys. Please try. They look a lot worse with their childishness if we just ignore them. If we respond in kind, they look justified in their sniping. And the train has to be dragged back onto the tracks.

 

[ClosedCaption]

It's because I refuse to take trolls like you seriously.

So now you're doing the girl thing where you dont like me so that clouds your judgement about everything I say.

You're so upset that if I said the sky was blue you'd say I was abusing you

Sigh. If I said the sky was blue, you'd label me a racist homophobe without a second thought. You want to play this game? Sure.

Aren't you being sexist? "Doing the girl thing"?

Actually I'd agree. See how you have me pegged all wrong?

Back to the topic and not me personally:

I was merely pointing out that if you dont accept intolerance then she believes that is intolerance. Basically there is no right or wrong because if you take a side you yourself are showing a negative trait which is intolerance.

So you cant judge, you cant express disagreement...basically its a PC mexican standoff and its bullshit.

Agree?

 

[ClosedCaption]

I imagine you dont know what that double speak means you just know that you agree with it and you dont like me so you dont like anything I say.