Un-Hip Bigots

Again I see your behaviour here as bigotted by your originating definition. You are completely intolerant to those who are not agreeing with you on this matter.




Edit: It seems to be, largely, dependant on where one stands on an issue that determines whether you'd find their intolerance to be righteous or bigotry. Just a thought.

 

Well, I suppose I am a bigot against bigots. I'll gladly accept that title.



Let me make something clear. Much of what I posted here I believe, but some of it was out of anger and frustration.

I DO NOT advocate censorship.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I have stated four times or more than we need EDUCATION, not legislation when dealing with bigotry.

I will not, however, frown upon social PRESSURES on bigots. They sure as hell pressure everyone else.

I say LIVE & LET LIVE with the only exception being those who want to limit the freedom of others. I see bigotry as being anti-freedom.

People in the government like BUSH, CHENEY, THE REPUGNANTCANS IN CONGRESS AND SCALIA/THOMAS on the Supreme Court are BIGOT FASCISTS who try to legislate their morality and stifle education.

The people here who are bigots are ignorant, I know, but it still angers me that we live in the 21st century and that there are folks who think they are hip and insult others sex lives who they don't approve of and then turn around and defend bigots.

I'll defend gay rights--hell I'll defend POLYGAMY rights before I'd side with the KKK or some HATE GROUP. But, apparently SOME of you here would rather don a white robe and hood than march in a gay pride parade.

So, there you have it. If I am bigoted towards anything--it's bigots. But, I DO NOT think we need to make it ILLEGAL, just SOCIALLY UNACCEPTABLE.

Catch my drift?

 

Being a bigot is a moral and personal issue. The term bigot is left in the broad sense and one has supplied the example of a person not willing to accept an open relationship as being a bigot rather than just accepting the fact its nothing more than an opinion on both sides (I personally see nothing wrong if both parties dont mind seeing others but doubt I will ever be that lucky, lol).


If we deem it a need to educate a "bigot" and its not some sort of law to do so than all we would be really doing is pressing what we view as a set of rules viewed by the supposed masses.

Maybe the masses appreciate the current goverment and like what they do (LMAO) thus anyone that does not agree would be a bigot?

I only claim that in an effort to stamp out what one side is "being a bigot" you would have to be a bigot to thier views. Its a no win situation.

 

Well, according to YOUR view, then. We should not have stamped out Hitler, but allowed him to have his freedom.

When it comes to HUMAN RIGHTS or FREEDOM, I am sorry, but freedom takes a backseat. You don't have the freedom to kill someone. Their life comes before your freedom.

Freedom is essential to a good life, but bigotry is ANTI-FREEDOM.

A bigot's freedom to stomp a person to death or the person's right to live free from this? I'll ALWAYS go with human rights in this case.

If THAT is bigotry, then you guys have generalized the definition to meaninglessness.

 

So because I'm ok with age of consent laws being set at 18, I'm a bigot? And you're ok with making that judgement?

Also, it's been made obvious that you're ok with an age of consent law as low as 16. Would you still be all about this sexual freedom if the age of consent law was set to 12?

 

No, I don't.

I consider you to be more oppressive than me, but I don't consider you a bigot. You don't HATE younger people, you just want to control their choices.

I don't agree with AOC laws myself.

 

I think they're choices need to be limited until they're far enough along to make an informed decision of their own. Without age of consent laws a parent could do absolutely nothing about a 30 year old man manipulating their 13 year old, impressionable, hormonal daughter into sex. And I don't know about you, but I don't know of too many 13 year old kids that can't be fairly easily manipulated.

Or how's this for a less dramatic example. My 15 year old child gets pregnant by a 15 year old boy. Who in the fuck is going to have to foot the bill? I am. No thanks. If they're not old enough to be resonsible for consequences of an action they shouldn't be able to take that action. It's for the best. And please don't ask, "For who".

 

Age of consent laws are arbitrary. If there are any restrictions to be made, then they should occur not on the basis of age, but rather through other means of individual verification of the capacity of maturity of each person.

The underlying premise is that people mature at different ages and at different paces.

The procedure would be similar in nature to what the courts do today in order to determine if an individual is in possession of all his faculties, being able to give informed consent.

Exceptions are made in other areas, they should be made in this one.

Again, that deals with age LAWS themselves. WE say a 15-year old is not capable of working a job. But, I was working at age 12 with my Dad. I was EXTREMELY capable at 15. However, THAT is not the point.

Your argument lies more within the culture we've created than the natural, "harmful" argument. It's different and a good one, but that's why I say EDUCATION and INFORMATION should come before FEAR and ABSTINENCE-ONLY bullshit.

Besides, if we can TRY a 15-year AS AN ADULT for murder, how in the world could we DENY his/her mental capacity to say "yes" or "no" to sex??? (i.e. statutory horseshit).

 

Hey my input had its intended directive, we are back on track to a very good debate and no name calling per say, i feel much better now.

 

I definitely do not agre with trying children as adults. Unless it's a close call. You know like the crime was committed 3 days before the 18th birthday with the understanding it'd be a slap on the wrist.

Law isn't the reason a child can't work at 15. In fact in most states schools allow children to work at the age of 15. They simply limit the number of hours the child can work. Most companies will not hire a 15 year old due to liability reasons with insurance. Now you've said you're a big proponent of education. And while I do believe there is education to be gained outside of school paramaters I believe it is the most important aspect of any childs education. Not only scholastically but socially and emotionally as well. Very few environments provide for a child what a school setting can within a single building. That being said I also believe in teh child labor laws that force the emphasis on education. Again, the child at the age of 15 cannot, no matter how well versed, truly know the rammifications of leaving school to work at the age of 15 to take care of the 15 year old girl he knocked up. Or do you disagree with this?

 

I cannot disagree with this. But, we will likely disagree as to what it is all about.

I believe that this was a product of our own creation--our socially conditioned society. It has nothing to do with nature and I think history would back this up.

Back 40 years ago, it was normal (and legal) for a 15 year old to work a job and even be married. Yes, here in America! But, all that changed. Is it better? Maybe, maybe not. Either way it makes no sense to criminalize what was once something beneficial to society, because it sure doesn't infringe upon the natural or human rights of anyone.

Statutory rape (for example) is a horrendous law and, I believe, unconstitutional, but our puritan society (oddly enough in the 21st century) still hold on to a culture conditioned with FEAR and false guilt.

 

I'm not siding with anyone. Open relationships are fine. Fuck whoever you want. If you want my approval, fine you have it, which the person criticizing you doesn't.

The only sex practices I've called sick are sexual practices with pediatry, rape, and things that involve gorillas.

But a bigot has a right to say whatever they want about it. If they bother you, ignore the fucker.

Nobodys legislating to protect their speech, their speech is inherently free, only laws can make their speech unprotected and laws to protect fellings aren't as important as our fundemental protections.

Don't make a martyr of yourself. Just becausen their are several peolpe here who don't want to legislate aginst speech doesn't mean they embrace any speech which is protected by the first amendment.

 

Make a martyr???

That's it!!!


*crucifies self*

 

You are correct that we disagree on the (main) cause of the massive emphasis on education during the last 25-40 years. You say it's nothing to do with the nature of people and everything to do with social conditioning. I say that it is almost exclusively human nature. Evolution of sorts. We as a species are are physically inadequate. That intelligence has brought about the use of tools to make up for these inadequacies. We can't fly like the birds so we created a plane. We can run like the horse so we invented carriages and moved on to cars and so forth. It's these technological advancements, which are part of our nature, that cause the need for better and further education.

If you had a 13 year old daughter and she slept with a 30 year old man, you'd be ok with this?

 

So, accordingly to your interpretation of evolution, the enlongating of juvenility throughout the past few decades is progress. I fail to see how it is so.

You must not know too many young people. They're not as stupid as you think.

If I had a 13 year old daughter, I'd feel the same way with her sleeping with anyone. Fucking is fucking.

But IF it happened, at least at 30, he could bear the responsibility of his actions in our society. At 15 year old--even you said yourself--that's not the case.

And that has EVERYTHING to do with our culture and society.

You don't have a strong sense of cultural history or diversity it seems. Otherwise you'd see that this was a strictly WESTERN creation.

 

wow... this means that blacks, hispanics, jews, homosexuals/lesbians and feminists are bigots because they are strongly partial to their group and only identify with others like themselves. More particularly, these bigots are intolerant of the majority and use their "alleged" victim-hood to justify their bigotry. Very very very interesting indeed. You may be on to something!

 

Well... apparently you believe in moralistic relativism. Very very flawed and juvenile way of thinking. There is an absolute right and an absolute wrong.

 

I don't believe there are any "absolutes" and that morality is creation of humankind. No Sky Daddy to hand it down in stone.

BUT!!!! It is a necessary creation if we are survive as a species, thus I find it perfectly natural and necessary in that light, but not "necessary" in an "absolute" sense.

I see no evidence of moral "absolutes" and plenty of evidence that morality is relative to circumstance, situation and even sometimes culture.

 

So, opposing discrimination and hateful treatment is bigotry???

Yeah, neither of you are ON TO something, but you may be ON something.

 

Discriminating one right to dislike a group peacefully is discrimination in its self. You may dislike a group of people and be open about it as you are yourself in here (i.e. political parties) and not he hateful just do not like them. You can voice your dislike and wishes such as not having to deal with them as you have done so many times in the past and sadly resorted to name calling and little snide comments.


We can all agree that none of this is anything better than personal opinions and they will all not be the same.

I do not agree that we can feel the need to educate a person for thier beliefs. Your attitude towards the current goverment and the country is pretty discriminating. I dont see what you have against the country, the country itself has done nothing really wrong just the laws and politics within it have issues but again that is myself being prejudice or a bigot about my beliefs.

Hate and intolerance is not the same. I dont tolerate strangers walking around my yard but I do not hate it. I dont hate state DOT but am intolerent to thier actions, thus Im a bigot.

As for race, sexual preference and ect hey its not my issue either way. You dont do something to personally cuase me or my family harm and bug off when I tell you to on my property so be it.

Honestly do you not believe that others disagree with your views, that they feel you are intolerent to thier views? You feel just in your views Im sure but they also feel the same in thiers, now who is the party to decide what views are acceptable and what views are not? Who decides on what education and who needs it? It all just seems another form of the moral police in the world according to ???