Who are the real bigots?

[bigrebnc1775]

Being opinionated, bigrebnc, is not necesarrily being bigoted. Know the difference.

Your premise about natural homosexuality is false. Prove it if you can. You can't.

Adj. 1. bigoted - blindly and obstinately attached to some creed or opinion and intolerant toward others; "a bigoted person"; "an outrageously bigoted point of view"

Are humans Asexual?

 

[drsmith1072]

The sad thing is there in lies QW's own bigotry based on his own interpretation of the word bigot.

He says that dismissing those who disagree with you on same sex marriage as a bigots makes you guilty of intolerance and then he cites the defintion of a bigot as including intolerance.

But then isn't he being dismissive of those who disagree with his position as he claims they are guilty of intolerance and therefore bigots?

It’s also a transparent attempt to stifle dissent with regard to those who will seek to have the North Carolina measure invalidated, by impugning their character and bringing into question their motives.

Do you even know how to follow a chain of logic to a conclusion? How is a blog written by a gay man who opposes the measure an attempt to stifle dissent with respect to people who oppose the measure?

I beleive he is refering to your comments not the blog. You try to argue that anyone who calls them bigots is guilty of intolerance and according to the definition that you provided that intolerance makes them a bigot.

Which according to your own spin about being dismissive of those who diagree with you makes you guilty of the same intolerance and bigotry.

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.


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

You dismiss everyone who disagrees with you as being intolerant which according to your own spin makes you intolerant and a bigot.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

a·sex·u·al (-sksh-l)
adj.
1. Having no evident sex or sex organs; sexless.
2. Relating to, produced by, or involving reproduction that occurs without the union of male and female gametes, as in binary fission or budding.
3. Lacking interest in or desire for sex.

 

[drsmith1072]

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.


Crumbs from the Communion Table • A challenge to both sides of the Amendment One debate.


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.

Yep, certainly sounds like those on this board who are against gay marriage are bigots...thanks for highlighting it...

Yep, that is exactly what I said. Thanks for proving your idiocy, and my point.

Again you claim that someone proved your point even as you fail to show how they did any such thing.

Please clarfiy your point and show how people are wrong instead merely claiming they are if you can.

you do have the substance to back up your spin don't you?

 

[drsmith1072]

Who cares what a bigot says about anything?

According to the OP being dismissive of those who disagree with you makes you the 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.

Too bad you weren't able to comprehend what he said.

Here let me point out what you obviously did not understand. He said, that being a bigot is being utterly intolerant of differing creeds, beliefs or opinions. He said being a bigot was NOT simply disagreeing with someone else.

You see, before you act as stupidly as you did, you should actually read and comprehend the post you are commenting on.

Note once again for the utterly dense: QW clearly and correctly stated that simply disagreeing with someone is not bigotry. Bigotry is the intolerant and hateful treatment of another class of people.

That is why you are a bigot, drsmith. NOT because you disagree with someone. Everyone disagrees with someone else, but rather because your posts are 100% hateful and intolerant of conservatives.

Your friend,

Immie

ah the troll who runs away from the fact that he accused me of "hatred" in my posts and then pastes previous posts of mine that were all about mere disagreements with no example of "hatred" LOL GJ on that one troll.

what you missed in your desperate attempt to troll me is the fact that my statement includes the word "dismissive" as part of the requirement that QW set up.

According to the OP being dismissive of those who disagree with you makes you the bigot.

I am not saying that "simply disagreeing with someone" makes you a bigot. In that respect you are being dishonest or you simply lack the intellegence to comprehend what you read. Which is it?

here is QW's post again.

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.

This is obviously an attempt by QW to argue that being "dismissive" of someone who disagrees with you makes you intolerant and then he goes on to state that intolerance is a part of being a bigot. What was the point of that if not to imply that "being dismissive of those who disagree with you makes you the bigot?"

 

[drsmith1072]

It’s also a transparent attempt to stifle dissent with regard to those who will seek to have the North Carolina measure invalidated, by impugning their character and bringing into question their motives.

You can't call them bigots because doing so makes you a bigot. LOL

More lies from you.

what am i lying about? in the op qw asked "who are the real bigots?"

then he presents an argument that states

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.

which means that if you are dismissive of those who disagree with you that makes you intolerant and therefore, based on the definition and the title of the op that he provided, qw is implying that you are the bigot.

What makes you a bigot is your past performance.

If you want to call me a bigot, you have to point out that 100% of my posts are hateful to liberals or homosexuals or people of color or whatever class of people you want to claim I am bigotted against. Hell, I'll be nice to you and even give you 80% of my posts... good luck.

says the hack who calls me a bigot when he has failed to show that 100% of my posts are hateful and in fact has posted quotes of those that are not disproving his own argument. LOL

 

[Immanuel]

I'm a bigot for not supporting the abnormal and illegal act of homosexuality
I'm also a bigot for not supporting the right for family members to marry.

Those were written as statements. That tells me that you are admitting to being a bigot. If you say you are, I will accept your word or it. I didn't call you a bigot. I don't know that you voted for the law or if you did, why you did so.

If those were intended as questions, I didn't say you were a bigot. What were your reasons for voting for the law, if you did?

Immie

I make no bones about it I am a bigot and anyone who says they aren't a bigot is lying to themselves. What I said was a statement.

drsmith should learn from you.

I made that very same point in my initial post regarding bigotry before he and I even started our conversation. Everyone has their prejudices. Some do, in fact, learn to control them and realize that those prejudices are their problem and no one else's.

Drsmith has been screaming for four days now that he is not a bigot. He's not only a bigot, but an asshole and a liar. Anyone who claims they are not prejudiced against others is, in fact, a liar. Drsmith has proven by his own posts that he is a bigot against conservatives. He is hate-filled and he is an asshole.

He simply can't come to grips with the fact that others see him as a bigotted asshole.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

According to the OP being dismissive of those who disagree with you makes you the bigot.

Too bad you weren't able to comprehend what he said.

Here let me point out what you obviously did not understand. He said, that being a bigot is being utterly intolerant of differing creeds, beliefs or opinions. He said being a bigot was NOT simply disagreeing with someone else.

You see, before you act as stupidly as you did, you should actually read and comprehend the post you are commenting on.

Note once again for the utterly dense: QW clearly and correctly stated that simply disagreeing with someone is not bigotry. Bigotry is the intolerant and hateful treatment of another class of people.

That is why you are a bigot, drsmith. NOT because you disagree with someone. Everyone disagrees with someone else, but rather because your posts are 100% hateful and intolerant of conservatives.

Your friend,

Immie

ah the troll who runs away from the fact that he accused me of "hatred" in my posts and then pastes previous posts of mine that were all about mere disagreements with no example of "hatred" LOL GJ on that one troll.

what you missed in your desperate attempt to troll me is the fact that my statement includes the word "dismissive" as part of the requirement that QW set up.

According to the OP being dismissive of those who disagree with you makes you the bigot.

I am not saying that "simply disagreeing with someone" makes you a bigot. In that respect you are being dishonest or you simply lack the intellegence to comprehend what you read. Which is it?

here is QW's post again.

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.

This is obviously an attempt by QW to argue that being "dismissive" of someone who disagrees with you makes you intolerant and then he goes on to state that intolerance is a part of being a bigot. What was the point of that if not to imply that "being dismissive of those who disagree with you makes you the bigot?"

Anyone who had the reading comprehension skills of a third grader would realize that his post states that there is a difference between just disagreeing with someone's point of view and being a bigot. I'm sorry, you can't comprehend that.

Your friend,

Immie

 

[Vast LWC]

Not human nature If it was part of human nature humans would be asexual.

Why is incest illegal jake?

That makes no sense at all.

 

[drsmith1072]

Those were written as statements. That tells me that you are admitting to being a bigot. If you say you are, I will accept your word or it. I didn't call you a bigot. I don't know that you voted for the law or if you did, why you did so.

If those were intended as questions, I didn't say you were a bigot. What were your reasons for voting for the law, if you did?

Immie

I make no bones about it I am a bigot and anyone who says they aren't a bigot is lying to themselves. What I said was a statement.

drsmith should learn from you.

I made that very same point in my initial post regarding bigotry before he and I even started our conversation. Everyone has their prejudices. Some do, in fact, learn to control them and realize that those prejudices are their problem and no one else's.

Drsmith has been screaming for four days now that he is not a bigot. He's not only a bigot, but an asshole and a liar. Anyone who claims they are not prejudiced against others is, in fact, a liar. Drsmith has proven by his own posts that he is a bigot against conservatives. He is hate-filled and he is an asshole.

He simply can't come to grips with the fact that others see him as a bigotted asshole.

Immie

Actualy I have ben asking you to prove your allegations and you have failed miserably.

You have argued that being "rude" makes me a bigot.

you have presented posts of mine saying thay are proof of hatred when they were mere disagreement.

You have even said that in order to prove you to be a bigot I would have to cite 100% your posts and show that eveyone is proof that you are a bigot and yet you haven't done the same for me.

your failure to prove your allegation across two threads has no bearing on me. LOL

 

[Immanuel]

You can't call them bigots because doing so makes you a bigot. LOL

More lies from you.

what am i lying about? in the op qw asked "who are the real bigots?"

then he presents an argument that states

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.

which means that if you are dismissive of those who disagree with you that makes you intolerant and therefore, based on the definition and the title of the op that he provided, qw is implying that you are the bigot.

What makes you a bigot is your past performance.

If you want to call me a bigot, you have to point out that 100% of my posts are hateful to liberals or homosexuals or people of color or whatever class of people you want to claim I am bigotted against. Hell, I'll be nice to you and even give you 80% of my posts... good luck.

says the hack who calls me a bigot when he has failed to show that 100% of my posts are hateful and in fact has posted quotes of those that are not disproving his own argument. LOL

Hack?

Right. I have given you the opportunity to provide one single post that was not hateful on your account. Then I gave you the chance to prove that I am a bigot and I didn't even require you to go to the standards that I have gone to. I'm asking you to provide one post out of six thousand. You must be really, really sorry if you can't even do that.

I cut you a hell of a lot of slack. I gave you the slack, because I know I can easily find many posts in which I have been polite to liberals and quite frankly, except for my dealings with TM and yourself, I don't think you can find very many posts at all that could even be considered "hateful" to a liberal.

Would you really like to be held to proving the same standards as I have held you to? That would require you to prove that nearly 14000 of my posts are hateful in reference to liberals rather than only 11,200. I can ask you to do so if you would like.

I have said that I don't usually read the posts of rdean, Chris or sealybobo, but I wouldn't consider that to be hateful. And actually, there are some conservatives (realize that some does not make me a bigot) that I like even less than tdm or the three listed above.

I don't want to be unfair to you. Have at it, prove that all 14,013 (including this post) of my posts are hatefut to liberals... good frigging luck, my friend.

Your friend,

Immie

 

[Vast LWC]

I would agree with almost all of this.

I do not agree with your last "BLANKET" statement. Surely many who voted for this did so as bigots, but you cannot be certain that all who voted against "gay marriage" in this case did so as bigots. Perhaps, they have legitimate religious beliefs about the term marriage and although they are not intolerant of or hateful to homosexual couples, they believe that marriage is sacred. Of course, IMHO they are not paying attention to things like divorce rates, but still. One need not hate people to vote against something that other people support.

From the little I know of the NC law, I would not have supported it. Although, I do believe the rite of marriage is sacred, I believe it is a religious rite and because of the Separation of Church and State, it should remain as such. I fully support civil unions for all couples not just homosexuals. Marriage should return to being a rite of the church and only a rite of the church. Couples who wish to be married (a religious blessing upon their union) should do so in their own church... and yes, that too applies to homosexuals.

Immie

So you are saying many people in North Carolina voted for this bill, and did not realize there was a stipulation that denied all other types of union in it?

If such people exist, then, yes, my blanket statement would not apply. However, voting for something without reading it is a pretty damn foolish thing to do.

 

[Immanuel]

I make no bones about it I am a bigot and anyone who says they aren't a bigot is lying to themselves. What I said was a statement.

drsmith should learn from you.

I made that very same point in my initial post regarding bigotry before he and I even started our conversation. Everyone has their prejudices. Some do, in fact, learn to control them and realize that those prejudices are their problem and no one else's.

Drsmith has been screaming for four days now that he is not a bigot. He's not only a bigot, but an asshole and a liar. Anyone who claims they are not prejudiced against others is, in fact, a liar. Drsmith has proven by his own posts that he is a bigot against conservatives. He is hate-filled and he is an asshole.

He simply can't come to grips with the fact that others see him as a bigotted asshole.

Immie

Actualy I have ben asking you to prove your allegations and you have failed miserably.

You have argued that being "rude" makes me a bigot.

you have presented posts of mine saying thay are proof of hatred when they were mere disagreement.

You have even said that in order to prove you to be a bigot I would have to cite 100% your posts and show that eveyone is proof that you are a bigot and yet you haven't done the same for me.

your failure to prove your allegation across two threads has no bearing on me. LOL

You have argued that being "rude" makes me a bigot.

Never once did I say that being rude made you a bigot. You are not only a bigot but a liar as well and desperate to boot. You go well beyond rude in every one of your posts.

What is that that you keep crying about? Don't put words in my mouth? Isn't that what you keep crying about and have done so everytime some points out what kind of a bigotted asshole you are?

You defined the word bigot in your first post about the subject. Live with it.

Your friend,

Immie

 

[drsmith1072]

Too bad you weren't able to comprehend what he said.

Here let me point out what you obviously did not understand. He said, that being a bigot is being utterly intolerant of differing creeds, beliefs or opinions. He said being a bigot was NOT simply disagreeing with someone else.

You see, before you act as stupidly as you did, you should actually read and comprehend the post you are commenting on.

Note once again for the utterly dense: QW clearly and correctly stated that simply disagreeing with someone is not bigotry. Bigotry is the intolerant and hateful treatment of another class of people.

That is why you are a bigot, drsmith. NOT because you disagree with someone. Everyone disagrees with someone else, but rather because your posts are 100% hateful and intolerant of conservatives.

Your friend,

Immie

ah the troll who runs away from the fact that he accused me of "hatred" in my posts and then pastes previous posts of mine that were all about mere disagreements with no example of "hatred" LOL GJ on that one troll.

what you missed in your desperate attempt to troll me is the fact that my statement includes the word "dismissive" as part of the requirement that QW set up.



I am not saying that "simply disagreeing with someone" makes you a bigot. In that respect you are being dishonest or you simply lack the intellegence to comprehend what you read. Which is it?

here is QW's post again.

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.

This is obviously an attempt by QW to argue that being "dismissive" of someone who disagrees with you makes you intolerant and then he goes on to state that intolerance is a part of being a bigot. What was the point of that if not to imply that "being dismissive of those who disagree with you makes you the bigot?"

Anyone who had the reading comprehension skills of a third grader would realize that his post states that there is a difference between just disagreeing with someone's point of view and being a bigot. I'm sorry, you can't comprehend that.

Your friend,

Immie

aw you call me names and fail to present a valid vounter argument. that means that you lose again, However, by now I bet you are used to that. LOL

How is calling someone else intolerant as you present a definition of the word bigot which includes "intolerant" as you ask the question "who are the real bigots" not an attempt to dismiss and call those who diagree with you a bigot?

Also it doesn't change the fact that you lied and misrepresented the argument by claimiing it was about "simply disagreeing" when the core of my statement ahd to do with "dismissing" those who disagree with you and that is based on QW's own words.

Where is your proof that 100% of my posts are hate filled? LOL

 

[Immanuel]

I would agree with almost all of this.

I do not agree with your last "BLANKET" statement. Surely many who voted for this did so as bigots, but you cannot be certain that all who voted against "gay marriage" in this case did so as bigots. Perhaps, they have legitimate religious beliefs about the term marriage and although they are not intolerant of or hateful to homosexual couples, they believe that marriage is sacred. Of course, IMHO they are not paying attention to things like divorce rates, but still. One need not hate people to vote against something that other people support.

From the little I know of the NC law, I would not have supported it. Although, I do believe the rite of marriage is sacred, I believe it is a religious rite and because of the Separation of Church and State, it should remain as such. I fully support civil unions for all couples not just homosexuals. Marriage should return to being a rite of the church and only a rite of the church. Couples who wish to be married (a religious blessing upon their union) should do so in their own church... and yes, that too applies to homosexuals.

Immie

So you are saying many people in North Carolina voted for this bill, and did not realize there was a stipulation that denied all other types of union in it?

If such people exist, then, yes, my blanket statement would not apply. However, voting for something without reading it is a pretty damn foolish thing to do.

Did I use the word many?

You implied all. I said some.

voting for something without reading it is a pretty damn foolish thing to do.

Hehe, maybe you should tell that to Nancy Pelosi and everyone of the Democrats that voted for Obamacare?

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

ah the troll who runs away from the fact that he accused me of "hatred" in my posts and then pastes previous posts of mine that were all about mere disagreements with no example of "hatred" LOL GJ on that one troll.

what you missed in your desperate attempt to troll me is the fact that my statement includes the word "dismissive" as part of the requirement that QW set up.



I am not saying that "simply disagreeing with someone" makes you a bigot. In that respect you are being dishonest or you simply lack the intellegence to comprehend what you read. Which is it?

here is QW's post again.



This is obviously an attempt by QW to argue that being "dismissive" of someone who disagrees with you makes you intolerant and then he goes on to state that intolerance is a part of being a bigot. What was the point of that if not to imply that "being dismissive of those who disagree with you makes you the bigot?"

Anyone who had the reading comprehension skills of a third grader would realize that his post states that there is a difference between just disagreeing with someone's point of view and being a bigot. I'm sorry, you can't comprehend that.

Your friend,

Immie

aw you call me names and fail to present a valid vounter argument. that means that you lose again, However, by now I bet you are used to that. LOL

How is calling someone else intolerant as you present a definition of the word bigot which includes "intolerant" as you ask the question "who are the real bigots" not an attempt to dismiss and call those who diagree with you a bigot?

Also it doesn't change the fact that you lied and misrepresented the argument by claimiing it was about "simply disagreeing" when the core of my statement ahd to do with "dismissing" those who disagree with you and that is based on QW's own words.

Where is your proof that 100% of my posts are hate filled? LOL

Since you can not present even one post that was not hate filled, and I have presented many that are, the sample is plenty large enough to sink your desperate ass.

The offer stands... present one that is not hate filled by you.

Hell, when we started this discussion, I told you that if you could tell me the conservatives name and subject of such a post that I would accept that. But, you can't even do that.

Admit it you dumb son of a bitch, you are a bigotted asshole. Keep denying it, and it only makes you out to be a lying bigotted asshole.

Your friend,

Immie

 

[drsmith1072]

drsmith should learn from you.

I made that very same point in my initial post regarding bigotry before he and I even started our conversation. Everyone has their prejudices. Some do, in fact, learn to control them and realize that those prejudices are their problem and no one else's.

Drsmith has been screaming for four days now that he is not a bigot. He's not only a bigot, but an asshole and a liar. Anyone who claims they are not prejudiced against others is, in fact, a liar. Drsmith has proven by his own posts that he is a bigot against conservatives. He is hate-filled and he is an asshole.

He simply can't come to grips with the fact that others see him as a bigotted asshole.

Immie

Actualy I have ben asking you to prove your allegations and you have failed miserably.

You have argued that being "rude" makes me a bigot.

you have presented posts of mine saying thay are proof of hatred when they were mere disagreement.

You have even said that in order to prove you to be a bigot I would have to cite 100% your posts and show that eveyone is proof that you are a bigot and yet you haven't done the same for me.

your failure to prove your allegation across two threads has no bearing on me. LOL

You have argued that being "rude" makes me a bigot.

Never once did I say that being rude made you a bigot. You are not only a bigot but a liar as well and desperate to boot. You go well beyond rude in every one of your posts.

What is that that you keep crying about? Don't put words in my mouth? Isn't that what you keep crying about and have done so everytime some points out what kind of a bigotted asshole you are?

You defined the word bigot in your first post about the subject. Live with it.

Your friend,

Immie

and here it is.

Holding up three posts out of nearly 6000 doesn't make you a pillar of impartiality, especially when all three of them were, in fact, rude to conservatives, The Rabbi and Willow, and the third was a slam on Glenn Beck. You must be a very proud bigot.

LOL

and I asked on several occasions how being "rude" is the same as being a bigot but you never responded. LOL

BTW you holding up three posts of me being "rude to conservatives" doesn't make me a bigot either.

I'm still wating on you to show that 100% of my posts are hate filled. Why haven't you done it? after all that is your standard is it not??

 

[BDBoop]

Anyone who had the reading comprehension skills of a third grader would realize that his post states that there is a difference between just disagreeing with someone's point of view and being a bigot. I'm sorry, you can't comprehend that.

Your friend,

Immie

aw you call me names and fail to present a valid vounter argument. that means that you lose again, However, by now I bet you are used to that. LOL

How is calling someone else intolerant as you present a definition of the word bigot which includes "intolerant" as you ask the question "who are the real bigots" not an attempt to dismiss and call those who diagree with you a bigot?

Also it doesn't change the fact that you lied and misrepresented the argument by claimiing it was about "simply disagreeing" when the core of my statement ahd to do with "dismissing" those who disagree with you and that is based on QW's own words.

Where is your proof that 100% of my posts are hate filled? LOL

Since you can not present even one post that was not hate filled, and I have presented many that are, the sample is plenty large enough to sink your desperate ass.

The offer stands... present one that is not hate filled by you.

Hell, when we started this discussion, I told you that if you could tell me the conservatives name and subject of such a post that I would accept that. But, you can't even do that.

Admit it you dumb son of a bitch, you are a bigotted asshole. Keep denying it, and it only makes you out to be a lying bigotted asshole.

Your friend,

Immie

Oh, look; for I have found a voice of reason amidst all the dross.

Wut up, home skillet?

 

[Immanuel]

Actualy I have ben asking you to prove your allegations and you have failed miserably.

You have argued that being "rude" makes me a bigot.

you have presented posts of mine saying thay are proof of hatred when they were mere disagreement.

You have even said that in order to prove you to be a bigot I would have to cite 100% your posts and show that eveyone is proof that you are a bigot and yet you haven't done the same for me.

your failure to prove your allegation across two threads has no bearing on me. LOL

Never once did I say that being rude made you a bigot. You are not only a bigot but a liar as well and desperate to boot. You go well beyond rude in every one of your posts.

What is that that you keep crying about? Don't put words in my mouth? Isn't that what you keep crying about and have done so everytime some points out what kind of a bigotted asshole you are?

You defined the word bigot in your first post about the subject. Live with it.

Your friend,

Immie

and here it is.

Holding up three posts out of nearly 6000 doesn't make you a pillar of impartiality, especially when all three of them were, in fact, rude to conservatives, The Rabbi and Willow, and the third was a slam on Glenn Beck. You must be a very proud bigot.

LOL

and I asked on several occasions how being "rude" is the same as being a bigot but you never responded. LOL

BTW you holding up three posts of me being "rude to conservatives" doesn't make me a bigot either.

I'm still wating on you to show that 100% of my posts are hate filled. Why haven't you done it? after all that is your standard is it not??

You were rude to and hateful of all conservatives in those posts. Do you not realize, well, maybe your less than third grade comprehension may not, that being hateful is in fact rude? Yes, you were rude to them in those posts as I stated. You were hateful of them... here's a clue, being hateful makes you rude you dumb son of a bitch.

Your friend,

Immie

 

[drsmith1072]

More lies from you.

what am i lying about? in the op qw asked "who are the real bigots?"

then he presents an argument that states



which means that if you are dismissive of those who disagree with you that makes you intolerant and therefore, based on the definition and the title of the op that he provided, qw is implying that you are the bigot.

What makes you a bigot is your past performance.

If you want to call me a bigot, you have to point out that 100% of my posts are hateful to liberals or homosexuals or people of color or whatever class of people you want to claim I am bigotted against. Hell, I'll be nice to you and even give you 80% of my posts... good luck.

says the hack who calls me a bigot when he has failed to show that 100% of my posts are hateful and in fact has posted quotes of those that are not disproving his own argument. LOL

Hack?

Right. I have given you the opportunity to provide one single post that was not hateful on your account. Then I gave you the chance to prove that I am a bigot and I didn't even require you to go to the standards that I have gone to. I'm asking you to provide one post out of six thousand. You must be really, really sorry if you can't even do that.

I cut you a hell of a lot of slack. I gave you the slack, because I know I can easily find many posts in which I have been polite to liberals and quite frankly, except for my dealings with TM and yourself, I don't think you can find very many posts at all that could even be considered "hateful" to a liberal.

Would you really like to be held to proving the same standards as I have held you to? That would require you to prove that nearly 14000 of my posts are hateful in reference to liberals rather than only 11,200. I can ask you to do so if you would like.

I have said that I don't usually read the posts of rdean, Chris or sealybobo, but I wouldn't consider that to be hateful. And actually, there are some conservatives (realize that some does not make me a bigot) that I like even less than tdm or the three listed above.

I don't want to be unfair to you. Have at it, prove that all 14,013 (including this post) of my posts are hatefut to liberals... good frigging luck, my friend.

Your friend,

Immie

I don't have to prove you wrong when you have done so on your own. I don't have to prove my innocence. You made the accusation and ahve failed to prove it. that is on you not me.

You required me to go to further measures to prove you are a bigot. Didn't you say that to prove you are a bigot that I would have to prove that 100% of your posts are nothing but hate and yuet you haven't done that were I am concerned so according to your own standards I am not a bigot. thanks.

The post that you commented on about kshergrl was postive but then you later tried to argue that it didn't count. LOL There is one and i have had several over the last few days. lol