• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Liberal Tolerance is a Total Fallacy

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
nehalem256 said:
I dont know, there seems to be a little difference between the holocaust and not recognizing same-sex marriages. But maybe that is just me :hmm:
Click to expand...

He was using it as an analogy, not literally. Where it would have been more applicable was if he applied it to Native Americans instead of gays since the Pubs have clearly decided to descriminate against Native Americans with their addendum to the Violence Against Women laws following a long line of holocaust type behavior by our government towards that demographic.
 
nehalem256 said:
I dont know, there seems to be a little difference between the holocaust and not recognizing same-sex marriages. But maybe that is just me :hmm:
Click to expand...

Your ability and willingness to not only take things way too seriously but also jump very far to distant conclusions is well documented.
 
Pr0d1gy said:
He was using it as an analogy, not literally. Where it would have been more applicable was if he applied it to Native Americans instead of gays since the Pubs have clearly decided to descriminate against Native Americans with their addendum to the Violence Against Women laws following a long line of holocaust type behavior by our government towards that demographic.
Click to expand...


I will assume you are talking about something like this

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2012/05/vawa_top10.html
9. It shields abusers of Native American women. Unlike the Senate bill, H.R. 4970 does not recognize tribal authority over non-Native American offenders when domestic violence or sexual assault is committed against Native Americans on tribal lands. In other words, the House bill gives non-Native Americans a “get out of jail free card” for sexual assault or domestic violence committed against Native Americans, even if the perpetrator lives on the reservation and is married to a tribal member. Half of Native American women are married to non-Native American men.
Click to expand...

So, if I am to believe this. Does that mean if I go onto a reservation and say stab a Native American man I cant be charged with anything since the tribe does not have authority over me :hmm:
 
zsdersw said:
Your ability and willingness to not only take things way too seriously but also jump very far to distant conclusions is well documented.
Click to expand...

Moonbeam is the one that made comparisons between the Holocaust and Republican "Bigotry" (basically amounting to not recognizing same-sex marraiges) against gays.
 
So Moonbeam posts this.

Germany faced a similar dilemma. After 50 million deaths, they decided to make membership in the Nazi party illegal. They decided to outlaw a party that would outlaw freedom if it came to power. We have not done that here. Maybe when 50 million gay people die of bigotry we will finally ban the Republican party.
Click to expand...

And you guys are faulting nehalem for calling him out on the gross analogical overkill?

The more I look at this thread, the more it looks as if you guys treat opposition to gay marriage as if it's akin to holocaust denial. I suppose in that regard Moonbeam's post is apt after all.
 
nehalem256 said:
Moonbeam is the one that made comparisons between the Holocaust and Republican "Bigotry" (basically amounting to not recognizing same-sex marraiges) against gays.
Click to expand...

Yes, and you made the mistake of taking what he/she said seriously. Anyone who frequents this forum as much as you should be able to read between the lines and see that Moonbeam shouldn't be taken seriously.
 
Atreus21 said:
So Moonbeam posts this.



And you guys are faulting nehalem for calling him out on the gross analogical overkill?

The more I look at this thread, the more it looks as if you guys treat opposition to gay marriage as if it's akin to holocaust denial. I suppose in that regard Moonbeam's post is apt after all.
Click to expand...

See post #31.
 
Tolerance is bullshit anyway. Claiming you are tolerant of someone's sexuality, religion, political stance is a fucking insult.

Tolerance is not acceptance.
 
Atreus21 said:
I see. So when someone says something retarded, you can always fault the person calling them retarded for the reason that the person who said it is retarded.

That's quite a rationalization.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about always? I was referring to Moonbeam.
 
Don't ever stand up to bigotry, or you're a bigot yourself. This is fast becoming my new favorite right wing canard.

- wolf
 
woolfe9999 said:
Don't ever stand up to bigotry, or you're a bigot yourself. This is fast becoming my new favorite right wing canard.

- wolf
Click to expand...

Telling someone they're a bigot is not bigotry. Kicking them out of your mall because you don't like their politics is a hell of a lot closer. What's the difference between kicking them out for their stance on gay marriage and kicking them out because they're muslim or presbyterian?
 
Atreus21 said:
Telling someone they're a bigot is not bigotry. Kicking them out of your mall because you don't like their politics is a hell of a lot closer. What's the difference between kicking them out for their stance on gay marriage and kicking them out because they're muslim or presbyterian?
Click to expand...

Nothing, but how do we know anything about the ideological position of those who did the kicking? We don't... but the link in the OP seems to know for sure that they're liberals.
 
Atreus21 said:
Telling someone they're a bigot is not bigotry. Kicking them out of your mall because you don't like their politics is a hell of a lot closer. What's the difference between kicking them out for their stance on gay marriage and kicking them out because they're muslim or presbyterian?
Click to expand...

That is not a good comparison.
 
Atreus21 said:
Telling someone they're a bigot is not bigotry. Kicking them out of your mall because you don't like their politics is a hell of a lot closer. What's the difference between kicking them out for their stance on gay marriage and kicking them out because they're muslim or presbyterian?
Click to expand...

There's a world of difference. Bigotry is disdain for people based upon group affiliation, not disdaining someone because you find their opinions to be reprehensible. We do that all the time in America, in a variety of contexts. If the person in question had a stated belief that gays should be put in gas chambers, would you object to them being excluded from something? The difference between that the and situation here is only one of degree, not a difference in kind. The example you're giving is qualitatively different.

- wolf
 
Oh right... from the last time...

Just to clear something up, it's okay to be bigoted, intolerant, and hateful towards ignorance and irrationality. These are not virtues or states of being that need protection and tolerance. They need to be rooted out and loathed. Hopefully this brings more of the crazy into the light and we can collectively shame and humiliate them for their idiocy.


I'm trying to counterpoint the nonsense arguments I see being lobbed at people using the word "intolerance" like it's a black mark on anyone, as though there are not actual things that should not be tolerated.

I understand that you're bored though. Carry on until you finish.
 
zsdersw said:
Yes, and you made the mistake of taking what he/she said seriously. Anyone who frequents this forum as much as you should be able to read between the lines and see that Moonbeam shouldn't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

So, Moonie makes an analogy and we're supposed to ignore it on the supposition that it's humor?
 
CharlesKozierok said:
1. Has this shopping mall claimed to be tolerant of everyone's views? Or is that something some blogger invented in order to attack them -- or even better, all "liberals", probably without actually knowing the beliefs of whoever made the decision?
Click to expand...

😵

2. I can be tolerant of the views of others and still not want to associate with them. For example, I think someone has the right to say, hate Jews. But if I find out you hate Jews, I'm not going to have anything to do with you.
Click to expand...

Correct. You simply cannot say you are tolerant of the views of others while being intolerant of the views of others. If someone claims to be tolerant and then tries to pass a law forcing their view onto others, they are not actually tolerant.
 
woolfe9999 said:
There's a world of difference. Bigotry is disdain for people based upon group affiliation, not disdaining someone because you find their opinions to be reprehensible. We do that all the time in America, in a variety of contexts. If the person in question had a stated belief that gays should be put in gas chambers, would you object to them being excluded from something? The difference between that the and situation here is only one of degree, not a difference in kind. The example you're giving is qualitatively different.

- wolf
Click to expand...

No, that is definitely a difference in kind. Saying that opposition to gay marriage is only a certain amount of degrees away from being in favor of gassing them is unfreakingbelievable. It's no different than conservatives arguing that being in favor of tax increases is just a hop skip and a jump from Stalin.

I seriously think liberals want to believe that conservatives are principally motivated by abject hatred of gays, and your example in part validates my suspicion. In the sense that a person is unable to imagine how their opposition could possibly be anything other than a monster, he is truly bigoted.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top