To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 23561
23560  |  23562
Subject: 
Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 19 Mar 2004 21:14:05 GMT
Viewed: 
412 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:


  
  
   They aren’t, but you’ve lost me.

“Everybody is intolerant of something” which you are using in relation to liberals being “intolerant of intolerance”. Translated, “Liberals are as big as jerks as racists (insert homophobes, mysoginists, etc, as appropriate) because they are intolerant of the racists intolerance.” That is, they are somehow equal in their intolerance. That is simply one of the stupidiest or most self-serving conclusions that I have ever seen and it is one that is routinely used by conservatives.

You say they aren’t the same, but your examples contradict yourself.

Ah, there was my confusion. They are the same, in a manner of speaking. If I hate clone-lovers, I am guilty of intolerance. If I am a pluralist and I can’t tolerate those who hate clone-lovers, then I am guilty of intolerance and hypocrisy.

So, you are saying that those that can’t stand racists aren’t as bad as the actual racists, they are worse. As I said, stupid or self-serving.


Look, all I am saying is that if one is going to preach tolerance (read: pluralists), than be tolerant in all circumstances, not merely when it serves one’s agendas.

  
  
It is the justification of the hypocrisy of the pluralists that I am trying to understand.


It is the justification of racism that I am trying to understand

There is no justification for it, except to say that everyone has the right to their own (however bigotted) opinion. It is that right that the pluralists can’t tolerate (unless it jibes with their own, as is ironically in the case of racism, with the concept of affirmative action)

   (well, I do, it is a game to try and put liberals in the defensive while glossing over the faults of conservatives).

There is no glossing (unless you are accusing conservatives of racism?), but merely pointing out liberal inconsistencies (WRT to this issue)

JOHN



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
 
(...) But, you're demanding that Liberals be tolerant of intolerance, so wouldn't you have to tolerate the Liberals' intolerance of intolerance? (...) Are we to understand, then, that you will henceforth be tolerant of homosexuals as well as of (...) (20 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
  Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
 
(...) And I am saying that those that want to be intolerant (read: haters of those different from their own narrow views) have come up with an ego-defense mechanism that tries to equate their intolerance of others as the same as the disapproval of (...) (20 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
 
(...) So, you are saying that those that can't stand racists aren't as bad as the actual racists, they are worse. As I said, stupid or self-serving. (...) It is the justification of racism that I am trying to understand (well, I do, it is a game to (...) (20 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

33 Messages in This Thread:











Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR