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

[Luissa]

Um... yeah, and you made her point, like so many trolls here have. You're intolerant of her intolerance. You're bent on attacking the poster. Hypocritical in asking for tolerance yet giving none. If someone bullied a child in school, you'd want that bully punished, yes? Now, lets say the kid fought back. Would he be the bully? Why? Why would you be a bully if you are merely defending yourself? Same concept here.

and she is intolerant of glaads intolerance......which has been pointed out as well and ignored because its shows just how ******* stupid the OP is and the Poster is.
she is ignoring posts because she is wrong.

YOU lost. Go back to sleep.

You should give him some of your Jack Daniels, el Presidente.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The T]

and she is intolerant of glaads intolerance......which has been pointed out as well and ignored because its shows just how ******* stupid the OP is and the Poster is.
she is ignoring posts because she is wrong.

YOU lost. Go back to sleep.

You should give him some of your Jack Daniels, el Presidente.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I GIVE NO ONE anything unless they are worthy. Now answer that on your TAPGROPE or get lost...

IDIOT.

 

[The T]

The terms of his contract no longer matter at this point now do they? Given the A&E reinstated him, they have completed that vicious circle of embarrassing themselves. The contract no longer matters. It took the ire and wrath of the viewership to recognize the error of your ways. You're here to troll, not address anything the OP discussed.

^Precisely. Good Form TK.

Don't choke on that.

Like YOU are. Get lost parasite.

 

[Luissa]

YOU lost. Go back to sleep.

You should give him some of your Jack Daniels, el Presidente.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I GIVE NO ONE anything unless they are worthy. Now answer that on your TAPGROPE or get lost...

IDIOT.

Answer what? Your drunk babbling?
So speaka drunky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Plasmaball]

Um... yeah, and you made her point, like so many trolls here have. You're intolerant of her intolerance. You're bent on attacking the poster. Hypocritical in asking for tolerance yet giving none. If someone bullied a child in school, you'd want that bully punished, yes? Now, lets say the kid fought back. Would he be the bully? Why? Why would you be a bully if you are merely defending yourself? Same concept here.

and she is intolerant of glaads intolerance......which has been pointed out as well and ignored because its shows just how ******* stupid the OP is and the Poster is.
she is ignoring posts because she is wrong.

YOU lost. Go back to sleep.

you literally have nothing else to do but troll. Adults are talking here tommy, and this conversation is way beyond your level. Maybe you need to go sign up for a colors forum and you can all elate about what color you like best or something?

You've added nothing but insults and brown nosing in this thread.

 

[Luissa]

^Precisely. Good Form TK.

Don't choke on that.

Like YOU are. Get lost parasite.

You prefer to choke on a bar whores toes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Foxfyre]

When you think about it, maybe we are seeing a push back. When is the last time you saw one of these big guns back down when they fired somebody over a flap like this? But A&E blinked under the pressure of millions of viewers who love Duck Dynasty and the Robertson family and expressed their support for them.

That is rather encouraging. Maybe the pendulum is swinging back to something more normal than the politics of personal destruction that we've been subjected to for the last 20 years?

As a matter of course? It is. The people are awake and aren't taking the PC crap any longer...A&E are the FIRST to feel the wrath...FAR too many more to go.

Okay, hopefully those discussing the topic now have all the trolls on ignore.

I don't think there was every a contract issue anyway. A&E knew Phil was doing the interview with GQ and they had given him no instructions of what he could and could not say. Phil had violated no 'tolerance rules' on Duck Dynasty. Again I don't agree with Phil's interpretation of scripture or how he explained it, but that it is really irrelevent. He is entitled to be who and what he is just as Ellen Degeneres is entitled to be who and what she is. And no big organization should have the right to try to harm either one of them physically and/or materially. In a way, what AFA did to Ellen was even worse because there was nothing offensive or controversial in the ad that she did.

If we are good people. If we value liberty. We should not condone either situation. People should be allowed to be who and what they are without fear that some mob, group, or organization will go after them to punish them physically and/or materially for no reason than they are who they are or they express an opinion that somebody didn't like.

 

[The T]

You should give him some of your Jack Daniels, el Presidente.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I GIVE NO ONE anything unless they are worthy. Now answer that on your TAPGROPE or get lost...

IDIOT.

Answer what? Your drunk babbling?
So speaka drunky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My Coherent post. What's the matter? Lost? Why yes you are. 'BYE.

 

[Montrovant]

I say this politely templar - have you reviewed his contract in order to make this assertion? Cuz if not, your post is NECESSARILY hyperbole.

The terms of his contract no longer matter at this point now do they? Given the A&E reinstated him, they have completed that vicious circle of embarrassing themselves. The contract no longer matters. It took the ire and wrath of the viewership to recognize the error of their ways. You're here to troll, not address anything the OP discussed.

what if this was all an act for ratings? The whole argument for both sides fail.

It wouldn't shock me to find out that is true.

Even if it didn't start as a scam, I wouldn't be surprised if some A&E execs used whatever influence they could to milk the situation.

 

[The T]

When you think about it, maybe we are seeing a push back. When is the last time you saw one of these big guns back down when they fired somebody over a flap like this? But A&E blinked under the pressure of millions of viewers who love Duck Dynasty and the Robertson family and expressed their support for them.

That is rather encouraging. Maybe the pendulum is swinging back to something more normal than the politics of personal destruction that we've been subjected to for the last 20 years?

As a matter of course? It is. The people are awake and aren't taking the PC crap any longer...A&E are the FIRST to feel the wrath...FAR too many more to go.

Okay, hopefully those discussing the topic now have all the trolls on ignore.

I don't think there was every a contract issue anyway. A&E knew Phil was doing the interview with GQ and they had given him no instructions of what he could and could not say. Phil had violated no 'tolerance rules' on Duck Dynasty. Again I don't agree with Phil's interpretation of scripture or how he explained it, but that it is really irrelevent. He is entitled to be who and what he is just as Ellen Degeneres is entitled to be who and what she is. And no big organization should have the right to try to harm either one of them physically and/or materially. In a way, what AFA did to Ellen was even worse because there was nothing offensive or controversial in the ad that she did.

If we are good people. If we value liberty. We should not condone either situation. People should be allowed to be who and what they are without fear that some mob, group, or organization will go after them to punish them physically and/or materially for no reason than they are who they are or they express an opinion that somebody didn't like.

I don't completely agree with what he stated either...but I defend his right to say it. And that's what's missing...TOLERANCE of INTOLERANCE.

 

[Luissa]

I GIVE NO ONE anything unless they are worthy. Now answer that on your TAPGROPE or get lost...

IDIOT.

Answer what? Your drunk babbling?
So speaka drunky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My Coherent post. What's the matter? Lost? Why yes you are. 'BYE.

Coherent to a bum, maybe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Iceman]

I am intolerant of tolerance of single mothers in politics and society.

 

[Montrovant]

When you think about it, maybe we are seeing a push back. When is the last time you saw one of these big guns back down when they fired somebody over a flap like this? But A&E blinked under the pressure of millions of viewers who love Duck Dynasty and the Robertson family and expressed their support for them.

That is rather encouraging. Maybe the pendulum is swinging back to something more normal than the politics of personal destruction that we've been subjected to for the last 20 years?

As a matter of course? It is. The people are awake and aren't taking the PC crap any longer...A&E are the FIRST to feel the wrath...FAR too many more to go.

Okay, hopefully those discussing the topic now have all the trolls on ignore.

I don't think there was every a contract issue anyway. A&E knew Phil was doing the interview with GQ and they had given him no instructions of what he could and could not say. Phil had violated no 'tolerance rules' on Duck Dynasty. Again I don't agree with Phil's interpretation of scripture or how he explained it, but that it is really irrelevent. He is entitled to be who and what he is just as Ellen Degeneres is entitled to be who and what she is. And no big organization should have the right to try to harm either one of them physically and/or materially. In a way, what AFA did to Ellen was even worse because there was nothing offensive or controversial in the ad that she did.

If we are good people. If we value liberty. We should not condone either situation. People should be allowed to be who and what they are without fear that some mob, group, or organization will go after them to punish them physically and/or materially for no reason than they are who they are or they express an opinion that somebody didn't like.

I wonder if it might work like the NFL. The NFL has no problems suspending players for violating their code of conduct. If they get arrested, if they make public statements opposed to what the NFL wants to see from it's players, they have a legal right to take punitive actions, even if the players were not doing anything football related at the time.

I realize that the NFL is an unusual business model, but might the A&E contract have worked in a similar fashion?

 

[Luissa]

As a matter of course? It is. The people are awake and aren't taking the PC crap any longer...A&E are the FIRST to feel the wrath...FAR too many more to go.

Okay, hopefully those discussing the topic now have all the trolls on ignore.

I don't think there was every a contract issue anyway. A&E knew Phil was doing the interview with GQ and they had given him no instructions of what he could and could not say. Phil had violated no 'tolerance rules' on Duck Dynasty. Again I don't agree with Phil's interpretation of scripture or how he explained it, but that it is really irrelevent. He is entitled to be who and what he is just as Ellen Degeneres is entitled to be who and what she is. And no big organization should have the right to try to harm either one of them physically and/or materially. In a way, what AFA did to Ellen was even worse because there was nothing offensive or controversial in the ad that she did.

If we are good people. If we value liberty. We should not condone either situation. People should be allowed to be who and what they are without fear that some mob, group, or organization will go after them to punish them physically and/or materially for no reason than they are who they are or they express an opinion that somebody didn't like.

I don't completely agree with what he stated either...but I defend his right to say it. And that's what's missing...TOLERANCE of INTOLERANCE.

What a stupid statement.
We don't have to tolerate it. We can believe he has the right to say it, but we don't have to tolerate it, el presidente. That's the part you guys don't get. You have the freedom to be a bigot, and we have the freedom to not tolerate it. We have the freedom to call you out on it.
Stop with the whiskey and you might get that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Luissa]

I am intolerant of tolerance of single mothers in politics and society.

Do you feel ignored?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The T]

Okay, hopefully those discussing the topic now have all the trolls on ignore.

I don't think there was every a contract issue anyway. A&E knew Phil was doing the interview with GQ and they had given him no instructions of what he could and could not say. Phil had violated no 'tolerance rules' on Duck Dynasty. Again I don't agree with Phil's interpretation of scripture or how he explained it, but that it is really irrelevent. He is entitled to be who and what he is just as Ellen Degeneres is entitled to be who and what she is. And no big organization should have the right to try to harm either one of them physically and/or materially. In a way, what AFA did to Ellen was even worse because there was nothing offensive or controversial in the ad that she did.

If we are good people. If we value liberty. We should not condone either situation. People should be allowed to be who and what they are without fear that some mob, group, or organization will go after them to punish them physically and/or materially for no reason than they are who they are or they express an opinion that somebody didn't like.

I don't completely agree with what he stated either...but I defend his right to say it. And that's what's missing...TOLERANCE of INTOLERANCE.

What a stupid statement.
We don't have to tolerate it. We can believe he has the right to say it, but we don't have to tolerate it, el presidente. That's the part you guys don't get. You have the freedom to be a bigot, and we have the freedom to not tolerate it. We have the freedom to call you out on it.
Stop with the whiskey and you might get that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^Doesn't get it OR LIBERTY, The Constitution, The First Amendment OR the Founders.

Just Destroy it ALL.

NO SURPRISE.

 

[Luissa]

I don't completely agree with what he stated either...but I defend his right to say it. And that's what's missing...TOLERANCE of INTOLERANCE.

What a stupid statement.
We don't have to tolerate it. We can believe he has the right to say it, but we don't have to tolerate it, el presidente. That's the part you guys don't get. You have the freedom to be a bigot, and we have the freedom to not tolerate it. We have the freedom to call you out on it.
Stop with the whiskey and you might get that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^Doesn't get it OR LIBERTY, The Constitution, The First Amendment OR the Founders.

Just Destroy it ALL.

NO SURPRISE.

What are you talking about, drunky?
I have freedom of speech too, which allows me to call out your bigotry and intolerance, and in this case your ignorance.
The fact you don't get that is more of a **** you to the Constitution.
You have no concept of what liberty means, moron. Maybe switching to Jim Beam will help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Foxfyre]

As a matter of course? It is. The people are awake and aren't taking the PC crap any longer...A&E are the FIRST to feel the wrath...FAR too many more to go.

Okay, hopefully those discussing the topic now have all the trolls on ignore.

I don't think there was every a contract issue anyway. A&E knew Phil was doing the interview with GQ and they had given him no instructions of what he could and could not say. Phil had violated no 'tolerance rules' on Duck Dynasty. Again I don't agree with Phil's interpretation of scripture or how he explained it, but that it is really irrelevent. He is entitled to be who and what he is just as Ellen Degeneres is entitled to be who and what she is. And no big organization should have the right to try to harm either one of them physically and/or materially. In a way, what AFA did to Ellen was even worse because there was nothing offensive or controversial in the ad that she did.

If we are good people. If we value liberty. We should not condone either situation. People should be allowed to be who and what they are without fear that some mob, group, or organization will go after them to punish them physically and/or materially for no reason than they are who they are or they express an opinion that somebody didn't like.

I don't completely agree with what he stated either...but I defend his right to say it. And that's what's missing...TOLERANCE of INTOLERANCE.

I think that's where some are missing the boat.

There is an unalienable RIGHT to be intolerant. I have an unalienable RIGHT to be intolerant of drunks, of smokers in confined spaces where I have to share the air, of people who won't control their kids, of people who insist on talking loudly on their cell phones when other people are trying to enjoy a meal or a movie or some other venue. Probably nobody would argue with me about that.

There is an unalienable RIGHT to be intolerant of the gay person who is in my face demanding respect. Or the Christian in my face demanding that I repent and be saved NOW. Or the Muslim in my face demanding that I allow Sharia Law. Or the family values activist in my face demanding that I boycott this movie or that program or a business featuring something in an ad. Or the PETA activist in my face demanding I give up certain kinds of food. Or the environmental wacko in my face demanding that I utilize some products and forego others.

And there is an unalienable RIGHT to be as bigoted or prejudiced or biased about anything or anybody just so long as we do not act out our bigotry or prejudice.

Everybody should have an unalienable right to their beliefs and convictions and to be who and what they are without fear that some mob, group, or organization will come after them to punish them for heresy.

 

[Iceman]

I am intolerant of tolerance of single mothers in politics and society.

Do you feel ignored?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did I touch a nerve?

 

[RKMBrown]

Okay, hopefully those discussing the topic now have all the trolls on ignore.

I don't think there was every a contract issue anyway. A&E knew Phil was doing the interview with GQ and they had given him no instructions of what he could and could not say. Phil had violated no 'tolerance rules' on Duck Dynasty. Again I don't agree with Phil's interpretation of scripture or how he explained it, but that it is really irrelevent. He is entitled to be who and what he is just as Ellen Degeneres is entitled to be who and what she is. And no big organization should have the right to try to harm either one of them physically and/or materially. In a way, what AFA did to Ellen was even worse because there was nothing offensive or controversial in the ad that she did.

If we are good people. If we value liberty. We should not condone either situation. People should be allowed to be who and what they are without fear that some mob, group, or organization will go after them to punish them physically and/or materially for no reason than they are who they are or they express an opinion that somebody didn't like.

I don't completely agree with what he stated either...but I defend his right to say it. And that's what's missing...TOLERANCE of INTOLERANCE.

I think that's where some are missing the boat.

There is an unalienable RIGHT to be intolerant. I have an unalienable RIGHT to be intolerant of drunks, of smokers in confined spaces where I have to share the air, of people who won't control their kids, of people who insist on talking loudly on their cell phones when other people are trying to enjoy a meal or a movie or some other venue. Probably nobody would argue with me about that.

There is an unalienable RIGHT to be intolerant of the gay person who is in my face demanding respect. Or the Christian in my face demanding that I repent and be saved NOW. Or the Muslim in my face demanding that I allow Sharia Law. Or the family values activist in my face demanding that I boycott this movie or that program or a business featuring something in an ad. Or the PETA activist in my face demanding I give up certain kinds of food. Or the environmental wacko in my face demanding that I utilize some products and forego others.

And there is an unalienable RIGHT to be as bigoted or prejudiced or biased about anything or anybody just so long as we do not act out our bigotry or prejudice.

Everybody should have an unalienable right to their beliefs and convictions and to be who and what they are without fear that some mob, group, or organization will come after them to punish them for heresy.

Define intolerant.

this one? "not willing to allow some people to have equality, freedom, or other social rights"

Just how do you plan to take away equality, freedom, and other social rights from parents that don't control their kids? What is your plan? Or did you mean the kids?