Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

broodstar wrote:

TheHammer wrote:Step 1: Redefine bigotry so that it only means active KKK members who are actively burning crosses in front of African American churches.

Or have people use the word correctly and not just as a personal attack to win debates.

If a person is expressing a bigoted position, and consistently does so, and won't be reasoned out of it, then it makes sense to call them a bigot. We absolutely should be cautious not to overuse and misuse the word just to insult people with whom we disagree. But neither should we allow bigots to play the victim by pretending that being called out on their bigotry is itself a form of bigotry.

broodstar wrote:

Step 2: Call anyone that disagrees with your bigoted world view a bigot or otherwise intolerant of your bigotry that is deeply rooted in a flawed and ridiculous understanding of Christianity.

Question: Why is the Chistian the bigot? Is this just a single example with many more unmentioned examples or are you say Chistans are the only group to commit bigotry?

They're not. That's not what he said. He said bigots are often people who have a deeply flawed understanding of Christianity. Most publically-visible bigots in this country seem to justify their bigotry in reference to Christianity. This is offensive to tolerant and nice Christians, as well as to the rest of us.

broodstar wrote:

Step 4: Pretend that it is just a coincidence that voter ID laws hurt African Americans,

OMG, it's such an inconvienence to go get an ID to vote. Tell me how going to get an ID is such an inconvienence ecspecially in states like South Carolina where ID's are FREE.

Yes, it is a significant inconvenience, if you don't have a car and you have to go a DMV many miles away to get an ID. Especially if you have a poor-paying job which doesn't offer you vacation days, and you are living paycheck to paycheck.

broodstar wrote:

attacking a woman's ownership of her own body,

I'm sorry, I'm stupid, what are you getting at?

Making laws to deny women the right to make choices about their own reproductive care and health.

broodstar wrote:

denying homosexuals equal rights and protection,

Hold on, rights and protection? Tell me where a Homosexual is denied the right to religion, speech, private property, do process, etc...?

How about the right to visit your spouse in the hospital when they're critically-injured? How about the right to inherit their Social Security benefits? And it's "due process".

broodstar wrote:

Complain about the New Black Panther Party standing in front of a polling place.

Come on, you and I both know that if the KKK had stood infront of a poll with a bat saying "If you vote, you better vote white", that gak would be all over the nows and wouldn't be dismissed. The Black Panthers are a racist group and should be afforded the same disrespect.

Please don't be so ignorant. Read something. The Black Panther Party WAS an old political group. The New Black Panther Party is a current-day group with about three members. How many crimes do you think they've committed? How many millions of people have they intimidated? The KKK committed thousands and thousands of murders and acts of terrorism against American citizens. The idea that you can equate one tiny insignificant group whose influence and threat has been almost entirely fabricated, with a massive and murderous organization which commited crimes for decades, is appalling.

Intolerance isn't a synonym for bigot.

Intolerance is a synonym for bigotRY.

Yes, pedantry. Then again, in English, your meaning often depends on the very placement of the right words and punctuation.

If there's one thing I just cannot tolerate, it's bigotry.

EVERYONE is bigoted against something. It's part of the human condition.

I wonder if there is anything Dakka will ever agree on.

They're not. That's not what he said. He said bigots are often people who have a deeply flawed understanding of Christianity. Most publically-visible bigots in this country seem to justify their bigotry in reference to Christianity. This is offensive to tolerant and nice Christians, as well as to the rest of us.

That's not what I was asking. From what I see the bigot is always linked with Christianity. Why is bigotry not linked to misuses of other teachings?

Yes, it is a significant inconvenience, if you don't have a car and you have to go a DMV many miles away to get an ID. Especially if you have a poor-paying job which doesn't offer you vacation days, and you are living paycheck to paycheck.

You know what the revolutionary soldiers and so on went through in order to procure that right. Walking through the snow of Valley Forge no boots, no clothes, suffering malnutrition, disease, etc.. and they do that gak for free. Tell me how strapping on some Timberlands and walking an hour or two to a DMV and at most pay 30 bucks for an ID. Tell me how you look that valley soldier in the eye and tell him what your ask to do is too much to ask?

Making laws to deny women the right to make choices about their own reproductive care and health.

I don't want to go off topic with this. So the child, without commiting a single crime, is going to pay the death penalty for the woman's choice. How is it bigotted to protect the right to life of the child?

How about the right to visit your spouse in the hospital when they're critically-injured? How about the right to inherit their Social Security benefits? And it's "due process".

First off, Social Security is not your property, if you have to sue the government to get it...it's not yours. You are sueing to seize assets from the government. Yes, I do believe the patient should be consulted for visitors. But if the patient is unconcious, how do the hospitol protect the patient's right to confidencallity? the hospitol needs it's right to private property, that way they can stop just anyone from walking in there.

Please don't be so ignorant. Read something. The Black Panther Party WAS an old political group. The New Black Panther Party is a current-day group with about three members. How many crimes do you think they've committed? How many millions of people have they intimidated? The KKK committed thousands and thousands of murders and acts of terrorism against American citizens. The idea that you can equate one tiny insignificant group whose influence and threat has been almost entirely fabricated, with a massive and murderous organization which commited crimes for decades, is appalling.

So these are the rallying cries of heroes?



I'm sorry that sounds like racism to me. I don't give a damn how small an organization is right now, it shouldn't be allowed to grow. Do not be so ignorant as to confuse the new black pathers with the black pather. They are nowhere near their namesake. They spew hate speech against whites, jews, and law enforcement. What are you waiting for the first body to turn up before you realize the threat? Any group that goes around spewing hate is appalling. I sapose the multipe weapons charges and the bounty on Zimmerman means nothing? right?

Here is a great example of Intolerance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrRxFoBSPng&feature=related
GG

chromedog wrote:Intolerance isn't a synonym for bigot.

Intolerance is a synonym for bigotRY.

Yes, pedantry. Then again, in English, your meaning often depends on the very placement of the right words and punctuation.

If there's one thing I just cannot tolerate, it's bigotry.

EVERYONE is bigoted against something. It's part of the human condition.

You're good. you're real good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

xole wrote:I wonder if there is anything Dakka will ever agree on.

I think we can all agree that a vote for Frazzled (Wiener Dog Party candidate for Presidency) is a vote for a very entertaining future Presidency.
"If a man can't have a good rum and Coke at 8.30 in the morning, then the terrorists have already won."
-Frazzled on a proper breakfast.

It is all too easy for those not bigots...to become bigots in their fight against bigotry. Its human nature.

generalgrog wrote:Here is a great example of Intolerance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrRxFoBSPng&feature=related
GG

I don't get what the video was about. People walking, whistle blowing, people shouting "shame on you". Did people run the police out of town?

broodstar wrote:

Yes, it is a significant inconvenience, if you don't have a car and you have to go a DMV many miles away to get an ID. Especially if you have a poor-paying job which doesn't offer you vacation days, and you are living paycheck to paycheck.

You know what the revolutionary soldiers and so on went through in order to procure that right. Walking through the snow of Valley Forge no boots, no clothes, suffering malnutrition, disease, etc.. and they do that gak for free. Tell me how strapping on some Timberlands and walking an hour or two to a DMV and at most pay 30 bucks for an ID. Tell me how you look that valley soldier in the eye and tell him what your ask to do is too much to ask?

This is pretty out there. So the "Revolutionary Soldiers" walked through Valley Forge (uphill both ways no less) in the snow so that all Americans could have Voter ID's? I'm not sure that's what they were walking for.

Frazzled wrote:
I think we can all agree that a vote for Frazzled (Wiener Dog Party candidate for Presidency) is a vote for a very entertaining future Presidency.
"If a man can't have a good rum and Coke at 8.30 in the morning, then the terrorists have already won."
-Frazzled on a proper breakfast.

I'd vote for the Wiener Dog Party. However, rum and coke at 8.30? What sort of drunken fiend are you? Thats Vodka and orange time. Coke is far to sweet for 8.30.

Regarding the OP, thought this image posted on Aaron Dembski-Bowden's blog was pretty amusing...

I think for this debate we must now define the difference between tolerance and acceptance.

dictionary.com

acceptance
noun
1. the act of taking or receiving something offered.
2. favorable reception; approval; favor.
3. the act of assenting or believing: acceptance of a theory.

dictionary.com

tolerance
noun
1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.
2. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own.
3. interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., foreign to one's own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint.

Question: What is the difference between asking one to be permissive of one's activities and asking one to approve of one's activities?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

whitedragon wrote:

broodstar wrote:

Yes, it is a significant inconvenience, if you don't have a car and you have to go a DMV many miles away to get an ID. Especially if you have a poor-paying job which doesn't offer you vacation days, and you are living paycheck to paycheck.

You know what the revolutionary soldiers and so on went through in order to procure that right. Walking through the snow of Valley Forge no boots, no clothes, suffering malnutrition, disease, etc.. and they do that gak for free. Tell me how strapping on some Timberlands and walking an hour or two to a DMV and at most pay 30 bucks for an ID. Tell me how you look that valley soldier in the eye and tell him what your ask to do is too much to ask?

This is pretty out there. So the "Revolutionary Soldiers" walked through Valley Forge (uphill both ways no less) in the snow so that all Americans could have Voter ID's? I'm not sure that's what they were walking for.

I believe that's avoiding the question.

broodstar wrote:
That's not what I was asking. From what I see the bigot is always linked with Christianity. Why is bigotry not linked to misuses of other teachings?

Most people who post on Dakka are christian and live in predominantly christian communities, so they will be more familiar with the bigotry commonly attributed to christians. However, we have many threads about bigoted behaviour from other groups, for example muslims and sometimes atheists and so on.

You know what the revolutionary soldiers and so on went through in order to procure that right. Walking through the snow of Valley Forge no boots, no clothes, suffering malnutrition, disease, etc.. and they do that gak for free. Tell me how strapping on some Timberlands and walking an hour or two to a DMV and at most pay 30 bucks for an ID. Tell me how you look that valley soldier in the eye and tell him what your ask to do is too much to ask?

Well, why do you have to ask? Why can't people vote?

First off, Social Security is not your property, if you have to sue the government to get it...it's not yours. You are sueing to seize assets from the government. Yes, I do believe the patient should be consulted for visitors. But if the patient is unconcious, how do the hospitol protect the patient's right to confidencallity? the hospitol needs it's right to private property, that way they can stop just anyone from walking in there.

Why does one kind of couple get treated differently by the government than another kind? It's very easy to find out what rights and so on are denied to homosexual couples due to the fact that they cannot marry. If you are too lazy to find out, I wonder at the potential for this exchange to be productive.

I'm sorry that sounds like racism to me. I don't give a damn how small an organization is right now, it shouldn't be allowed to grow. Do not be so ignorant as to confuse the new black pathers with the black pather. They are nowhere near their namesake. They spew hate speech against whites, jews, and law enforcement. What are you waiting for the first body to turn up before you realize the threat? Any group that goes around spewing hate is appalling. I sapose the multipe weapons charges and the bounty on Zimmerman means nothing? right?

He's not confusing them. He stated clearly that they are not the same group, but rather, a very small extremist group who should be despised and ignored, much like fringe neo nazi groups and so on.

On the main topic, the dictionary definition of words is often not helpful. People consider that denying others rights based on religious views is a form of bigotry, that's really the end of the story. And GG, if you don't want that quote to be thrown back at you, then consider your words more carefully in future. Putting paedophilia and homosexuality together like that could easily be seen as conflating them, showing them as being related.
As to your talk of sexual perversion, well, I dunno. You're awful touchy about your way of life being criticised, if I were to label your brand of christianity a heresy or intellectual perversion, how would you feel?

generalgrog wrote:

So I ask you what is a bigot?.......... really?

GG

You do realize you're whole opening statement applies to you as well right? So lets hear you say "I'm GG and I'm a bigot" Then the healing can begin.

Do you tolerate the LGBT community? or are you so intolerant of them you feel the need to vote against them having the same government granted rights of marriage?

Not born that way eh? any chance you are wrong about that?

Pacific wrote:Regarding the OP, thought this image posted on Aaron Dembski-Bowden's blog was pretty amusing...

You feel that the name rolls easy off the tongue????

I didn't like that video, because I reckon the science is really dodgy any of those scientific answers could be wrong- the stats are really dodgy to me and the language used by the narrator is
heavily biased.
Not saying there isn't a genetic component mind you, but that doesn't mean there's not any choice involved or that environment doesn't also play a role.

Sorry to poop on that often contested point, I just don't think the evidence is strong enough either way.

Of course, since I see nothing inherently wrong with homosexuality, I don't think it matters if it's a choice or not- homosexuals should get equal rights as far as possible, anyhow.

Da Boss wrote:I didn't like that video, because I reckon the science is really dodgy any of those scientific answers could be wrong

The "gay gene" is a misnomer. It's a complex series of genes which code for far more than sexuality. But it IS part of genetics.

Effectively, most of the population carries some or most of the genes for homosexuality. It's only in a rare few (around 2-7% of the population depending on what metric you use, but 4-5% is the median) in which the genes mix in just the right way that they are entirely homosexual. Most people are to some extent bisexual instead. It varies from gender as well, to some extent, with women having an even greater tendency towards bisexuality.

In fact, more and more research is showing that many of the most virulent homophobes are actually themselves highly repressed homosexuals, with the most common cause for their repression parental disapproval by extremely strict parents. Quite a few self-identified strongly heterosexual males become very aroused at the sight of gay porn in tests, indicating bisexual or homosexual, but their minds are trained in such a way by their parents that they repress this and viciously attack those who they perceive as gay.

I'd agree with most of what you're saying, but I'd say that I would place less faith in current studies than you are, tbh. I think it's likely that the gene complexes that code for homosexuality are likely (like most gene complexes) to require complex environmental cues to be fully activated in at least some cases. I think there is probably a segment of the population that could be "genetically gay" but I also think there's enough fuzzyness in the spectrum of sexuality to mean that there are probably a few who could be "genetically straight" who are "environmentally gay". Anything to do with brain activity is colossally complex and multivariate, most of the time, and most studies involving humans have a fairly weak statistical basis if they're not tracking a simple mechanism or using insanely large data sets which don't rely on "self identification".

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

You probably have some pretty ugly issues and views of race if you complain about how awful the New Black Panther Party is, AND are in favor of voter ID laws that are done to lower African American voter turn out.

As a white guy I'm constantly distressed by how other white men see any attempt to create equality and diminish white privilege as "racism" against white folk.

But, seriously, if you think we live in a racially equal society there's a pretty good chance you have some really serious and ugly issues involving race.

And, yes, it probably isn't an accident that there exists a large political party in this country that only attempts to do things that favor straight, white, Christian, men. There's no ideology schizophrenic enough to call for limited government when it's advantageous to white men in certain situations while also calling for bigger government in situations where it only hurts non-whites.

Da Boss wrote:I also think there's enough fuzzyness in the spectrum of sexuality to mean that there are probably a few who could be "genetically straight" who are "environmentally gay".

Probably, but they are a very, very tiny minority even amongst the already small gay population.

There are far, far more people who are genetically gay or bisexual who happen to be socially "encouraged" (IE coerced) in to being "straight".

I understand why people try to argue the science of homosexuality, although it seems silly to argue science to homophobes who are most likely against science in every other political conversation ever, but it shouldn't matter.

If someone says they're gay, great. If someone says they're straight, great. Who cares? What's wrong with respecting someone as long as they don't do anything that harms the world or its people?

I imagine there is a strong correlation between people who believe evolution is a lie, climate change is a fraud, and homosexuality is evil so why even bother arguing science with those folks?

TheHammer wrote:I understand why people try to argue the science of homosexuality

Genetics is interesting?

That's the reason I argue it

Well, why do you have to ask? Why can't people vote?

Now we have something, why don't we let people vote, hell why not let people vote four or five times. Is there something wrong with asking you to prove you are who you say you are in order to perserve the right to vote for another person?

Why does one kind of couple get treated differently by the government than another kind? It's very easy to find out what rights and so on are denied to homosexual couples due to the fact that they cannot marry. If you are too lazy to find out, I wonder at the potential for this exchange to be productive.

Oh no, I know, they are all financial, of which I agree government should be blind and that taxation and benefits should be equal for all people engaging in the same activity. However, I don't think anything finnancial can be discribed as a right. Here's a question do you have a right to be married? It's one thing to ask to be permissive of one's activities, it's another to ask for acceptance. It's one thing to ask me to tolerate one sexual preferance, it's another thing to ask me to accept it.

He's not confusing them. He stated clearly that they are not the same group, but rather, a very small extremist group who should be despised and ignored, much like fringe neo nazi groups and so on.

He did say they not the same group, he did not say they were extremist. IMO he show favor of them, saying the fact that I would equate them with the KKK is appaling. As to your comment, I will have to respectfully disaggree, I don't think they should be ignored, they should be shown for what they are.

TheHammer wrote:I understand why people try to argue the science of homosexuality, although it seems silly to argue science to homophobes who are most likely against science in every other political conversation ever, but it shouldn't matter.

If someone says they're gay, great. If someone says they're straight, great. Who cares? What's wrong with respecting someone as long as they don't do anything that harms the world or its people?

I imagine there is a strong correlation between people who believe evolution is a lie, climate change is a fraud, and homosexuality is evil so why even bother arguing science with those folks?

You're right, mostly you can't change those peoples views, but the reason to post the proper science is to refute them for anyone else who is reading this.

broodstar wrote:Now we have something, why don't we let people vote, hell why not let people vote four or five times. Is there something wrong with asking you to prove you are who you say you are in order to perserve the right to vote for another person?

I have a voter registraiton card. That proves who I am as well as any driver's license.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

broodstar wrote:Here's a question do you have a right to be married?

According to the Supreme Court of hte United States, yes.

broodstar wrote:

Oh no, I know, they are all financial, of which I agree government should be blind and that taxation and benefits should be equal for all people engaging in the same activity. However, I don't think anything finnancial can be discribed as a right. Here's a question do you have a right to be married? It's one thing to ask to be permissive of one's activities, it's another to ask for acceptance. It's one thing to ask me to tolerate one sexual preferance, it's another thing to ask me to accept it.

Amendment #14
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Also, you should probably read a book before you click-clack on your keyboard.

Melissia wrote:

TheHammer wrote:I understand why people try to argue the science of homosexuality

Genetics is interesting?

That's the reason I argue it

It really is. Logically, it should clear up the whole debate. Sadly it does not.

Additionally, I recall there being some small part of the brain that is different in gay/lesbian folks. It's more feminine than it's supposed to be in gay people and more masculine than it's supposed to be in lesbians.

I'd look it up but I lack the time.

I wouldn't even argue the environment is significant for the gay people themselves, I would argue it is significant for their parents. Stress may have some role to play in the development of a gay person.

TheHammer wrote:
Amendment #14
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Also, you should probably read a book before you click-clack on your keyboard.

You're really going to try that? OK, how is that depriving someone of life, liberty, or property?

broodstar wrote:

generalgrog wrote:Here is a great example of Intolerance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrRxFoBSPng&feature=related
GG

I don't get what the video was about. People walking, whistle blowing, people shouting "shame on you". Did people run the police out of town?

I don't think you watched the whole thing then.
The people being escorted by police were Christians. If you look closely one lady is having to cover her infant while she is being protected from the mob of angry gays

Melissia wrote:I have a voter registraiton card. That proves who I am as well as any driver's license.

I sappose, touche, I don't carry my voter registraition card so I just show my driver's license. You do agree that you should prove who you are, right?