Liberal Tolerance is a Total Fallacy

[monovillage]

And you're not going to tolerate it, like the Germans?

Moonie, stop it with the Nazi shit.

 

[her209]

Again, just more proof of the accuracy of the OP.

Why do you want to silence the believed silencers? Just more proof of accuracy of the OP.

 

[RightIsWrong]

I'm still waiting for the evidence that the shop/mall owners claimed to be liberal or tolerant instead of just being labeled as such by some random right wing blogger copying the work of another long-time right wingnut who was quoting a Brietbart.com writer.

Joe Newby is an IT professional who has been involved in conservative politics for years. In 1991, he ran for City Council in Riverside, California, and has served as a campaign manager for local conservatives in California and Idaho, including former Idaho State Representative Jeff Alltus. For a year, he hosted a local access cable talk show that covered conservative politics. He attended the University of Arkansas, Community College at Batesville where he graduated summa cum laude in 2005.

 

[Moonbeam]

Moonie, stop it with the Nazi shit.

But you got all upset when I mentioned it, thinking I had bad reasons, but now you run away from my question when I show it's relevant. Typically conservative reaction.....

 

[monovillage]

Why do you want to silence the believed silencers? Just more proof of accuracy of the OP.

Who is trying to silence them? Certainly not me. They show and prove their intolerance, their bigotry and their hate with every attack they make on moderates and conservative Republicans.

 

[her209]

Who is trying to silence them? Certainly not me. They show and prove their intolerance, their bigotry and their hate with every attack they make on moderates and conservative Republicans.

Sure you are. That's the whole premise of this thread. And you keep referring back to the OP.

 

[monovillage]

Sure you are. That's the whole premise of this thread. And you keep referring back to the OP.

Sorry, but you're wrong. The OP made no reference in trying to silence people like you. In fact here's what he said in case some people have forgotten his OP.

I ran across this this morning after reading a thread here created by one of our brain-dead leftists. A thread in which he tried desperately again and again to control what was said and thought.

This gave me a big laugh so I thought I'd share it.

He was obviously referencing a liberal/progressive that was trying to silence debate. I'd say business as usual, but I wouldn't want to insult a liberal by saying "business" or "work".

 

[her209]

Sorry, but you're wrong. The OP made no reference in trying to silence people like you. In fact here's what he said in case some people have forgotten his OP.

He was obviously referencing a liberal/progressive that was trying to silence debate. I'd say business as usual, but I wouldn't want to insult a liberal by saying "business" or "work".

LOL love the back peddling with a subtle personal attack in there.

 

[monovillage]

LOL love the back peddling with a subtle personal attack in there.

What back peddling?

 

[1prophet]

So a bigot who wants to deny others an opportunity to live their lives how they see fit is offended when others deny him an opportunity to shop where he wants. Tough.

If he is trying to deny others than yes, if he is just speaking his mind than let him speak no matter how reprehensible since they are just words and by his words he will be judged.

People tend to forget it was not to long ago that the religious right at it's height wanted to ban words and liberals were the ones to oppose them on 1st amendment grounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ISil7IHzxc

 

[her209]

What back peddling?

 

[DominionSeraph]

When compared to moderates and conservatives..."Liberal tolerance" appears to be quite the oxymoron.

This is because "conservative intelligence" is too.

I do not need to hear a conservative spout his beliefs. I can model him in BASIC on an 8088 -- the conservative himself is redundant. Unless one is doing research on cognitive failures there's really no reason to listen to a conservative. I do not need to hear parts of a belief structure that is warped to be in compliance with the belief that the Earth was created 6000 years ago by an invisible man who lives in the sky and who dances around granting wishes.

 

[Steeplerot]

If people have valid points then they should be listened to, but listening to a conservative is like having to sit through commercials, everything they repeat dutifully is corporate PR, after awhile they stop being funny where its sad, instead of just being douchey rah rah partisans they actually start to believe the BS they are fed like cultists with the us vs them pitting Americans against one another thing. Willful intellectual laziness is not something to be encouraged. Rather it should be laughed at and derided for the suckers they are.

Every conservative I have known in my life have had major personal issues (paranoid schizophrenia being a very common one that conservatism attracts) that lead them to be so reactionary. The fantasyworld cons live in is not a healthy thing. Nor has it ever been for society.

 

[nehalem256]

This is because "conservative intelligence" is too.

I do not need to hear a conservative spout his beliefs. I can model him in BASIC on an 8088 -- the conservative himself is redundant. Unless one is doing research on cognitive failures there's really no reason to listen to a conservative. I do not need to hear parts of a belief structure that is warped to be in compliance with the belief that the Earth was created 6000 years ago by an invisible man who lives in the sky and who dances around granting wishes.

Well lets be fair. That is a little less warped than claiming men and women are equal and then passing law after law after law to provide protections for women and transfer wealth from men to women :\

 

[dwell]

Are Muslims banned from The Grove? It's an interesting paradox. Muslims are largely anti-gay but unfairness to Muslims is about the most un-liberal act you can commit in the US these days.

 

[Jhhnn]

The best part of all this whining about "liberal intolerance" is that it's coming from the same people whose comments stop just short of "kill them all!" in our OWS threads...

Having God on your side, like Pacquaio, must make all the difference...

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This is because "conservative intelligence" is too.

I do not need to hear a conservative spout his beliefs. I can model him in BASIC on an 8088 -- the conservative himself is redundant. Unless one is doing research on cognitive failures there's really no reason to listen to a conservative. I do not need to hear parts of a belief structure that is warped to be in compliance with the belief that the Earth was created 6000 years ago by an invisible man who lives in the sky and who dances around granting wishes.

And you have absolutely no right to prevent it from being spoken. If it's in a public place you are free to leave. I may not want to hear whatever you have to say but I haven't the right to gag you for it.

 

[thraashman]

Well lets be fair. That is a little less warped than claiming men and women are equal and then passing law after law after law to provide protections for women and transfer wealth from men to women :\

You really, really don't seem to get it. The reasons that laws get passed to protect women is that they have to be. Laws (usually) aren't passed to solve a problem that doesn't exist (unless it's voter id laws). These laws have been passed because when not in place women get treated worse. There are plenty of men in this country (Republicans) who would treat women as bad as they possibly can if these laws didn't exist. While women enjoy greater equality in the US than they do in most of the rest of the world, if we don't actively enforce that equality then it erodes into nothingness.

Yes, we get it. You're a far right extremist that supports every crazy far right position no matter how asinine it is. But you should at least be able to think before you post. I say should because your posting history has suggested otherwise.

 

[nehalem256]

You really, really don't seem to get it. The reasons that laws get passed to protect women is that they have to be. Laws (usually) aren't passed to solve a problem that doesn't exist (unless it's voter id laws). These laws have been passed because when not in place women get treated worse. There are plenty of men in this country (Republicans) who would treat women as bad as they possibly can if these laws didn't exist. While women enjoy greater equality in the US than they do in most of the rest of the world, if we don't actively enforce that equality then it erodes into nothingness.

No you dont get it. If you have to pass laws to make women "equal" to men. Then clearly they are not equal.

And what does forcing men to subsidize women's health care have to with men not treating women fairly?

And if men and women are abused why is it only necessary to pass special laws protecting women?

Just for a start.

 

[jackstar7]

No you dont get it. If you have to pass laws to make women "equal" to men. Then clearly they are not equal.

And what does forcing men to subsidize women's health care have to with men not treating women fairly?

And if men and women are abused why is it only necessary to pass special laws protecting women?

Just for a start.

Laws aren't passed to "make" women equal. They are passed so that under the law they are treated equally.

Can you manage to grasp the subtleties of this?


You attitude reeks of some "male burden" you believe you have to unjustly bear. It's absurd. And you should be mocked for it.

 

[Moonbeam]

Laws aren't passed to "make" women equal. They are passed so that under the law they are treated equally.

Can you manage to grasp the subtleties of this?


You attitude reeks of some "male burden" you believe you have to unjustly bear. It's absurd. And you should be mocked for it.

Why should he be mocked for a brain defect induced incapacity to think. Do you think he has choice in the matter. If you can mock him for his defect he can mock women or gays or anybody he likes on the same basis. Teaches the wrong lesson, I think.

 

[nehalem256]

Laws aren't passed to "make" women equal. They are passed so that under the law they are treated equally.

Can you manage to grasp the subtleties of this?


You attitude reeks of some "male burden" you believe you have to unjustly bear. It's absurd. And you should be mocked for it.

Except passing laws forcing men to subsidize women's healthcare is not about treating them equally :\

And passing laws to protect women from domestic violence, but not men is not about treating them equally :\

 

[jackstar7]

Why should he be mocked for a brain defect induced incapacity to think. Do you think he has choice in the matter. If you can mock him for his defect he can mock women or gays or anybody he likes on the same basis. Teaches the wrong lesson, I think.

I'm not convinced that the defect is insurmountable. And I do think his attitude towards the law is simplistic and borne of a perceived burden he feels he must unjustly shoulder, and as such I believe it ought to be mocked as a means of provoking him to question just how far from the pack of rational adults he has wandered.

This mindset that our shared burdens must be the fewest and for the least benefit is so short-sighted and laced with an insecurity I simply cannot allow it to go unanswered, and with derision. It shows such a vast disrespect to the brilliance of society, and to each other as persons sharing in the benefits of this society. I am sorely intolerant of such hateful behaviors, and to this point I have yet to imagine a passive means to countering them.

 

[nehalem256]

Why should he be mocked for a brain defect induced incapacity to think. Do you think he has choice in the matter. If you can mock him for his defect he can mock women or gays or anybody he likes on the same basis. Teaches the wrong lesson, I think.

Expecting "independent" women to provide for themselves is not mocking.

 

[CallMeJoe]

...And passing laws to protect women from domestic violence, but not men is not about treating them equally :\

Do you also posit that every law protecting children from sexual abuse by adults requires a corollary protecting adults from sexual abuse by children lest we oppress adults?