[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Kazan
Mongoose: to tolerate your intolerance would be to allow bigotry to spread.

you have the right to HAVE your opinion, you have the right to VOICE your opinion - that doesn't mean you have the right to have your opinion RESPECTED
 

So you're ok if he doesn't RESPECT your _opinion_?

[Kazan]

nuclear1: supporting politicians who push forward bigoted laws is equally bigoted

[NGTM-1R]

Originally posted by Kazan
nuclear1: supporting politicians who push forward bigoted laws is equally bigoted

No, that's reality. Unless you specifically mold your own beliefs for the purpose, you'll have a hell of a time finding someone to vote for who agrees with you on every issue.

[Grey Wolf]

Here's my official opinion on this subject.

Do whatever you want in your home as long as:
A. I'm not forced to sit and listen to it.
B. You don't hurt anyone.

[Nuclear1]

Originally posted by Kazan
nuclear1: supporting politicians who push forward bigoted laws is equally bigoted

I agree with Republicans on some social issues, others I disagree on. I don't vote for the extreme right (i.e. the religious right), as I don't agree with their positions on stem cell research, abortion, and gay rights. I agree with Republican fiscal and foreign policies, but not on many social policies.

I vote for politicians that can fight the war on terror wherever it goes, and I vote for politicians that can help build the economy. I don't vote for politicians because of their social positions.

Note to Kazan: assuming that one side of an argument has no valid points is just about as bigoted as what you accuse Republicans of. You're acting no better than those who oppose gay rights; the religious right refuse to hear out gay right activists, and you simply refuse to hear out anyone who has a differing opinion than yourself.

EDIT: I'm in agreement with Grey Wolf on this. If you choose to do so in your own home and don't force it on me or harm anyone else in the process, for the most part, I'm perfectly alright with it.

[Kazan]

Yes republicans has GREAT fiscal policies - huge deficit spending and tax cuts for those who don't need them are GREAT for the economy

Supporting a bigot in office is being a bigot.

I don't HAVE to hear out bigots.  Bigots can go to hell, I do not give ground to bigots - they are anathema to democracy.  They have no business in this country.  If people want to be bigots they can go to some lesser country and rot.

[WMCoolmon]

Originally posted by Sandwich


Ok, so what are your thoughts on this guy's story? Not to bring religion into this topic, but I'd be interested in hearing people's thoughts on this.

I think, from what I've heard, it's a perfectly realistic story; but I don't think it's necessarily b/c of God, or that all homosexuals are the same.

To me, it sounds like he suffered from low self-esteem/depression as a child, so when the guy exposed himself he started wondering what was wrong with him. He felt isolated and so ended up with the other guy, because he was reaching out to other males, including that guy; Possibly he also suspected it. Then he mentions giving himself up to 'perversion'.

My interpretation of that is that he felt something was wrong with him, and he rationalized it by creating the idea that he was a homosexual, because of the very bizarre situation with the guy in a restroom. Every time he chose to participate in a later encounter, he reinforced that belief within himself. When he finally went to the concert, he finally gave it up, and stopped trying to be a homosexual.

[Nuclear1]

Originally posted by Kazan
I don't HAVE to hear out bigots.

Therefore, nobody has to hear you out. You seem bigoted against Republicans, and therefore, you seem to be your own anathema to democracy.

Supporting a bigot in office is being a bigot.

Excuse me, did you read my post? I don't support the politicians for their anti-gay policies; I support them because of their foreign policies and fiscal policies. If you're looking a politician with my kind of beliefs, try Schwarzeneggar. He's the first example that comes to mind.

No matter what you say, I'm not a bigot. I don't have a problem with gays, blacks, hispanics, Asians, or any race. I do have a problem with people who believe in absolutism, which means I have more than a right to have a problem with you.

You can hate Republicans if you want. It's your right, after all, as an American to choose your political party. I'll just say that at one point I was a lot like you, but in my case I hated Democrats, simply because I was raised by a religious family and lived in red states (Indiana and North Carolina), but now I have a much more fair and balanced view of the issues. Sadly, it seems that you don't. Anytime that someone disagrees with you, they instantly seem to you as a bigot or going to hell for their beliefs.

That's all I have to say. Now, can we turn this back into a civilized discussion about homosexuality, and not a bigot witchhunt?

[Kazan]

I don't care one wit why you support them - they put forward bigoted legislation - you support them, you are therefore supporting a bigot and are as bad as them

FURTHERMORE your pathetic excuse for a reasion to support them is laughable "fiscal policies" WHAT fiscal policy other than "more money into the hands of our cronies" - look at the history of the budget deficit, republicans don't know what they're doing when it comes to the economy.  They know jack **** about economics.

"Foreign policy" the foriegn policy of "we know best and if you disagree **** you, we're going to start wars and then mismanage them!"

GREAT foreign policy.

I don't consider it bigotry to call someone an idiot when they're being an idiot nuclear1.  The republican party was once upon a time not controlled by fundamentalist bigots and i could debate with a republican without them putting their fingers in their ears and saying "lalala" or asserting that they're right when the real world application of what they're talking about has been PROVEN to be disasterous.  I once could debate with a republica without them saying "you're unamerican!" for disagring with the president.

If anyone is bigoted it is the entirety of the republican party and the majority of their remaining supporters.  I do not tolerate bigotry, it is not bigoted to be intolerant of a bigot.


If my position of refusing to tolerate bigotry and corruption is extremist compared to yours than perhaps you should look upon yourself to see who is actually extremist

How is that administration of "ending corruption and scandals" you got in washington going? didn't one of them just get indicted or
something?

Originally posted by nuclear1

Sadly, it seems that you don't. Anytime that someone disagrees with you, they instantly seem to you as a bigot or going to hell for their beliefs.

So you assert - but you are being dishonest in doing so.  You've seen people disagree with me before without me calling them a bigot.

However I'm going to call someone a bigot IF THEY ARE ONE (mongoose, liberator), or I'm going to say they are AS BAD AS ONE if they SUPPORT ONE.


Perhaps you should take a long hard look at the policies of those you are supporting - ESPECIALLY the policies you profess to support

[Fineus]

If you (and that is all of you) can't calm down then you know what's going to happen. Lockage and bannage from the main forum. You've had enough warning about this before. Last chance.

[Grey Wolf]

The concept of smaller government and decreased expenditures is not a bad idea. Trick-down theory is.

[Kazan]

Grey Wolf

I agree - smaller government and decreased expenditures is a good idea - but the republican party doesn't stand for either anymore.

I think government needs to be smaller, but there are certain things that are also it's responsibility.  These tasks should be taken on in the most efficient manner possible.

The budget needs to be balanced, we need to be running surplusses and paying off the national debt.  The taxing system is currently unbalanced - too much of the tax burdeon is on the lower tiers, repealing the bush tax cuts would greatly solve this problem.  After that adjustments to the tax system can be considered as we pay down the debt and get inefficient expenditures under control.  We need a strong military, but the spending associated with it is grossly inefficient - the taxpayers are being fleeced and our soldiers aren't getting the equipment they need.

It is in everyone's interest to have good, affordable health care.  It is in everyone's interest to help out the poor when they need it - everyone may be poor at one time or another, and helping them out reduces the crime rate.  (preventing crime is cheaper than prosecuting it).

Gun control is required for safety, but it has to be sane often those on my side of the political spectrum have very knee-jerk reactions about guns so they pass ineffective laws "to protect the children."  Gun control must be effective and reasonable.  

The education system needs to be a lot better funded, the funding model of being tied to the local taxes is very bad - a better alternative.  Perhaps all state taxes marked for education being pooled into one pool and dished out would work.  This would end the problem of underfunded intercity schools.   However for schools to be effective the family has to be supportive.


I could go on.. bring up a specific issue and I will state my piece.

[TrashMan]

As long an actor acts good and I like the movie (like LOTR) I'll respect the actor and watch the movies... Alltough I must admitt a certain degree of dissapointment when I found out about Gandalf..

so what? -- he's gay. Big deal.
Abnormal behavior is becoming the norm these days, but unlike most other things, homosexualism isn't really a choice so how can you actually blame someone for being gay?

[Kazan]

TrashMan: exactly

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Kazan
I don't care one wit why you support them - they put forward bigoted legislation - you support them, you are therefore supporting a bigot and are as bad as them

FURTHERMORE your pathetic excuse for a reasion to support them is laughable "fiscal policies" WHAT fiscal policy other than "more money into the hands of our cronies" - look at the history of the budget deficit, republicans don't know what they're doing when it comes to the economy.  They know jack **** about economics.

"Foreign policy" the foriegn policy of "we know best and if you disagree **** you, we're going to start wars and then mismanage them!"

GREAT foreign policy.

I don't consider it bigotry to call someone an idiot when they're being an idiot nuclear1.  The republican party was once upon a time not controlled by fundamentalist bigots and i could debate with a republican without them putting their fingers in their ears and saying "lalala" or asserting that they're right when the real world application of what they're talking about has been PROVEN to be disasterous.  I once could debate with a republica without them saying "you're unamerican!" for disagring with the president.

If anyone is bigoted it is the entirety of the republican party and the majority of their remaining supporters.  I do not tolerate bigotry, it is not bigoted to be intolerant of a bigot.


If my position of refusing to tolerate bigotry and corruption is extremist compared to yours than perhaps you should look upon yourself to see who is actually extremist

How is that administration of "ending corruption and scandals" you got in washington going? didn't one of them just get indicted or
something?



So you assert - but you are being dishonest in doing so.  You've seen people disagree with me before without me calling them a bigot.

However I'm going to call someone a bigot IF THEY ARE ONE (mongoose, liberator), or I'm going to say they are AS BAD AS ONE if they SUPPORT ONE.


Perhaps you should take a long hard look at the policies of those you are supporting - ESPECIALLY the policies you profess to support

Whatever happened to respecting peoples opinions?

[Grey Wolf]

That is a point, aldo. A very good point indeed.  By ignoring peoples rights to opinions, you are approaching totalitarianism.

[NGTM-1R]

Christ man, you even attack Liberator when you know he's not here, AND it has no relevance whatsoever to the discussion. What the hell's wrong with you?

[Kazan]

aldo_14: the concept of respecting an opinion no matter what is foolish

an opinion should only be respected if it is deserving of respect.

[Grey Wolf]

You don't need to respect the opinion, but you must respect their right to have that opinion unless you want to remove democracy entirely.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Kazan
aldo_14: the concept of respecting an opinion no matter what is foolish

an opinion should only be respected if it is deserving of respect.

What gives you any right to decide who and what should be respected?  If you're going to expect anyone to listen to you, you might as well give them the illusion of civility, rather than launching into a long diatribe that ends with effectively calling nuclear1 either a) a bigot, b) an idiot (who supports bigots), c) an extremist or d) all of the above.  Replete with CAPITALS YOU MAKE YOU SOUND LIKE YOU MUST BE RIGHT even when they don't have any contextual or grammatical value.

Christ, you know I agree with you on a fair number of things (not all, but a fair number).  But that's not the way to respond unless you want to start a shouting match.  And frankly, I'd rather have a nice, peaceful, discussion.