Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LegoLord]

Are you, in general, tired of people being intolerant of your belief, or lack thereof?  This, I hope, is the thread to be in.  This thread, I want people to try to promote tolerance of other's beliefs.   There seem to be a lot of people rather ignorant of the idea of tolerance, which I find rather depressing and irritating.

Want to point out every flaw in someone's belief or lack thereof?  Then don't post here.  At all.  That is not what this thread is for.  This thread, I intend to not be a flame war.  I intend for it to be a place where people can just ignore the differences of religion and find sympathy with others who are also annoyed by those who pay far too much attention to the religion of another.

From the next post after this, the objectives of the thread are this:

• First, to have no one saying anything about what religion someone else is.  If you can't say anything supportive, or asking for support, just don't post.
• Second, not to have a flame war.  There shouldn't be, if we stick to the premise of the thread, but I wouldn't be surprised if a troll came and tried to turn this thread that way.
• Third, not to have any talk about a problem with missionaries or converters* in a way that insults those of an "opposing" belief.

I know the religious flaming seems to be dying down, but I want to do what I can to make sure it stays that way, without Toady or Threetoe needing to come in and lock every religious thread there is.  I want to have a civil discussion here.

*anyone know a better term for the atheistic version of a missionary?  Or does missionary fit?  Either way, trying to convert people when they do not seek conversion has quite a tendency to inflict stress.  Really, don't do it.

[Duke 2.0]

 Say for example, I find being gay wrong. I also find hating and being intolerant wrong. Thus I can preserve my beliefs and yet not cause hate and strife by not being hateful of people of differing beliefs. That is, unless they actively try to do something that opposes my moral standards directly to me or try something illogical that violates my standard for tolerance to somebody else.

 Thus why I avoid such threads: I'll state my beliefs, somebody will accuse me of being a homophobe or other such nonsense when I have done nothing to actively or passively against such people. Am I entitled to my beliefs?

 And while religions have been given such a bad reputation, I blame individual people. These are ultimately good institutions, but there are the idiots that get into it and screw it up for everybody. Same with Atheists, who also have idiots who are Atheists because they a cynical bastards. Every group larger than ten people has an idiot who wants to screw it all up. An idiot who wishes to be intolerant of others, or hate.

 Now note I do not wish to attack anybody but the people responsible, as the sooner they are called out upon such things the sooner they can stop perverting the real purpose of such a group. Still, I strive to be at peace with them. Love thy enemies is a good quote, no matter what you do or do not believe.

[Yanlin]

*Sees thread title*

So if there's something I can't tolerate, it has to be people who hide behind "It's my opinion and I am entitled to it!"

THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT'S CORRECT!



But anyway, short rant time:

Being an atheist where I am is pretty much as bad as being gay. Yes. Tolerance is not very high.

[MrWiggles]

A challenge to any belief isn't being intolerant.

The word belief shouldn't be safe passage from examination. This allows nefarious things to fester, such as healing crystal being used on cancer patiences. Which results in time and money lost. And in far to common assurance, lost of life. Or Scientology to continue, or Jenny McCarthany anti vaccine bandwagon to continue. Its her belief, in spite of evidence or her body count, she continues to hold.

Yes anyone is welcome to believe in anything they want.

For instance, thing that being gay is wrong. Is fine. However you can't demonstrate that being gay is harmful to those who are or persons around them. And is in the realm personal opinion.

Pedophillia, is shown to not be a choice as well. However, we can demonstrate that its harmful to those around them.  And therefore no longer subjected to personal opinion.

In sense of support, it more defensible to dislike and think pedophiles are wrong then to think that homosexual males are wrong.

*EDIT: though=to

[Akroma]

I can't tolerate intolerance


also I think people with prejudices are generaly stupid

[MrWiggles]

I can't tolerate intolerance


also I think people with prejudices are generaly stupid

I'm curious did you use the paradoxical lead in statement to show that your prejudices against prejudices was ironic?

[Akroma]

it is true enough that people who claim to be tolerant are often enough intolerant

sure, there is some certain irony in what I said, but I can say for sure that I am intolerant towards intolerant people, so my statement is correct

[sneakey pete]

I don't know about anyone else, but i'm still at the stage of trying to grasp why anyone gives a crap about stuff like this argued over the internet.

[MrWiggles]

I don't know about anyone else, but i'm still at the stage of trying to grasp why anyone gives a crap about stuff like this argued over the internet.

Apathy does nothing?
Debating is fun?

[Ampersand]

Tolerance implies that there is something you find distasteful about the thing you are tolerating. We don't 'tolerate' bad behavior, we punish it. We don't 'tolerate' people of different races, we accept the common shared humanity that all human beings have. When Akroma says "I can't tolerate intolerance" what is meant by each instance of the verb tolerate encompasses broader ideas.

In any case, I stand with MrWiggles.

Also, since I didn't catch it while I was typing, I don't specifically care about anything that is stated on an internet debate, but the concept of a spirited, but not mean spirited, debate is appealing to me. And that is what upside-down-question-mark seemed to keep forgetting in other threads. I cannot believe I'm saying this, but I like Patrick J. Buchanan. I despise most of what he stands for, but he can have a spirited, heated debate with a person, then leave all the emotion that may have been exposed during that debate where it was, and act perfectly friendly with the person who was his adversary afterwards. That is a sign of intelligence that I can respect.

[MrWiggles]

Tolerance implies that there is something you find distasteful about the thing you are tolerating. We don't 'tolerate' bad behavior, we punish it. We don't 'tolerate' people of different races, we accept the common shared humanity that all human beings have. When Akroma says "I can't tolerate intolerance" what is meant by each instance of the verb tolerate encompasses broader ideas.

In any case, I stand with MrWiggles.

With which bit?
And thank you.

[Rilder]

I don't know about anyone else, but i'm still at the stage of trying to grasp why anyone gives a crap about stuff like this argued over the internet.

Intarnets Crusades tbh.

Also I'm usually tolerant to most people, unless they piss me off.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

winning an argument on the internet is like winning the special Olympics.

[MrWiggles]

winning an argument on the internet is like winning the special Olympics.

Hot chicks will date you?

[Ampersand]

Jesus. How did my edit not tell me there were five posts after it? I would have just made a new post.