Post A Reply
Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board
Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk
More liberal hypocrisy
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by NR: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Upside: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by NR: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Upside: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by NR: [qb] He is racist, homophobic and chauvinist. He described himself as such by his own words. Redneck? Ok, that was probably inappropriate but most "rednecks" I've met don't find that name offensive and often wear it with pride. [/qb][/QUOTE]There you go with the sterotypes again. :D [/qb][/QUOTE]I dunno, maybe so. I did a ton of survey work for lots of country folk in West Virginia, and nobody there seemed to mind being called a "redneck" by a "hippie" from California. [/qb][/QUOTE]Just a joke. The only reason I'm in this discussion is to point out what I personally see as fallacies of the whole universal acceptance thing. Bigotry to one degree or another is part of our make up and it's not necessarily a bad thing. It keeps truly abhorrent things in check and it inspires lively debate on chat boards. One of my concerns though is where is the line drawn and who draws that line. Does an all accepting society have to be just that, all accepting? Would a group of pedophiles be allowed to become a part of mainstream society? Don't chuckle and say "of course not", it may be sick and twisted to you and me but there's a lot of them out there. Do we have to accept them as normal behaving people too? In an all accepting society who sets the standards? Someone has to or we'll devolve back into savages. [/qb][/QUOTE]You are correct, everyone is a bigot in one way or another, even myself. I just don't believe that the 1st Amendment protects you from the consequences of being a bigot, and yet that seems to be the banner under which people are rushing to defend "Mr." Robertson. IMO, a tolerant society is willing to entertain all "ideas" and treat them equally regardless of who presents them and how off the wall or contrary to the "norm" they may seem. [b]HOWEVER, after careful examination, and open debate, some of those ideas should be equally rejected because they are a detriment to human society as a whole. I also believe that the ideas of some are beyond debate, because they are inherently wrong and/or violate the basic rights of others.[/b] Does this mean we have to accept everyone and everything they do in order to be a tolerant society? I don't believe so. Do I think religion should decide? No way, history is ripe with examples of "religious tolerance"... :rolleyes: IMO, the standards must be set, (as best can be set), mostly by society as a whole, but also by a few basic truths that are self evident. Call me intolerant, but I will not tolerate someone being sexist, racist or homophobic, and damn the consequences. IMO, behaving in such a manner violates your basic rights as a living human on the planet Earth. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Allstocks.com Message Board Home
© 1997 - 2013 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.