Are Re-Education Camps That Far Fetched?

[firstfloor]

I think you're in denial. You gave a definition of tolerance that you yourself do not live up to - you lost the 'skirmish' when you wrote that idiot definition. Not my fault you don't understand your own definition.
Now, stick your fingers back in your ears and pretend you're not a hypocritical bigot - or get it in gear and figure out a definition that doesn't make you both a bigot and a hypocrite. Your choice.

Since you don’t seem to like my definition may I ask what yours is.

[seer]

Yes, and it's within the rights of other free citizens to ask that he be removed as the company sees fit. Again, I didn't agree with the decision, but there's nothing illegal about this. He isn't being imprisoned by the government for expressing an opinion.

I'm not saying it was illegal, just pointing to the lack of tolerance coming from the left. Who are always demanding tolerance for their views.

This is absolutely false, seer. Think about all those clergymen and leaders who've been defrocked or forced to step down after performing or condoning same-sex marriages. Think about the lead singer for the Christian band "Jars of Clay," who was heavily criticized and censored by Christian media and radio stations after expressing a favorable opinion of gay rights. And if you want an example of Christian-on-secular discrimination, there's that incident in which One Million Moms tried to force JC Penney to drop Ellen DeGeneres as company spokesperson. Some liberals certainly seem hypocritical, but it's an outright falsehood to declare that genuine intolerance is one-sided.

The church is a completely different animal. Why does one have to have a particular view of a homosexual kiss to play football? As far as Ellen Degeneres you had to go back two years for that. And she didn't lose her job like the Mozilla CEO. Look at all the threads on this board, the vast, vast majority of this is coming from the left and that is fact.

[Teallaura]

I think you got yourself tied up in knots. I have no idea what you are on about so I hereby declare myself the winner of this little skirmish. Is that okay with you?

I think you're in denial. You gave a definition of tolerance that you yourself do not live up to - you lost the 'skirmish' when you wrote that idiot definition. Not my fault you don't understand your own definition.

Now, stick your fingers back in your ears and pretend you're not a hypocritical bigot - or get it in gear and figure out a definition that doesn't make you both a bigot and a hypocrite. Your choice.

[fm93]

So what if he contributed money to support traditional marriage? That should be his right as a free citizen.

Yes, and it's within the rights of other free citizens to ask that he be removed as the company sees fit. Again, I didn't agree with the decision, but there's nothing illegal about this. He isn't being imprisoned by the government for expressing an opinion.

I think Jones' reaction to homosexual men french kissing is perfectly natural.

Either we have different definitions of french kissing, or you didn't actually watch any video. The kisses were short and simple--they weren't drawn out or over-the-top. For a football player like Jones, who sees people suffer violent hits and concussions and broken bones and torn muscles and bloody injuries every week, it's strange that he should feel such horror and disgust at the sight of two men sharing brief kisses.

And he still should have the right to express his disgust without fear of consequence.

No. Neither he nor anyone else in this country ever had the right to say things without fear of consequence. The First Amendment ensures that the government can't arrest you for what you say, and even then there are still certain limits. It never promised that you could say anything without any consequences.

Also, as I was scrolling through the thread I found this comment, which I felt warranted a response.

There is no, and I mean zero, evidence of Christians trying to get people fired or fined or ostracized for supporting let's say gay marriage or gay rights. The intolerance is coming from the left is far more destructive than anything coming from the conservatives.

This is absolutely false, seer. Think about all those clergymen and leaders who've been defrocked or forced to step down after performing or condoning same-sex marriages. Think about the lead singer for the Christian band "Jars of Clay," who was heavily criticized and censored by Christian media and radio stations after expressing a favorable opinion of gay rights. And if you want an example of Christian-on-secular discrimination, there's that incident in which One Million Moms tried to force JC Penney to drop Ellen DeGeneres as company spokesperson. Some liberals certainly seem hypocritical, but it's an outright falsehood to declare that genuine intolerance is one-sided.

[seer]

Unfortunately, I am not in the best position to see it as well as you do but I would be surprised if it was as bad as you think. Your man Tocqueville is an interesting fellow.
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”
- Alexis de Tocqueville

What FF? There is nothing to see but the facts - at every turn it is the left driving these issues, trying to get people fired or some other consequence for simply having a different opinion. And the de Tocqueville is a perfect example of the Socialistic Democrat party of today, and why they will destroy this nation.

“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

[firstfloor]

Correcting Firstfloor's exotic vocabulary now.

Someone should put you on the naughty step.

[firstfloor]

Not yet, yet being the key word here. But like I said FF, it is the left trying to shut down speech and punish those with opposing opinions. Fascism light is coming from the left - that is a fact, whether you see it or not.

Unfortunately, I am not in the best position to see it as well as you do but I would be surprised if it was as bad as you think. Your man Tocqueville is an interesting fellow.
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”
- Alexis de Tocqueville

[firstfloor]

It's your definition - and you just proved again that you don't practice what you preach. Guess 'tolerance' is something you only demonstrate to those you agree with.

I think you got yourself tied up in knots. I have no idea what you are on about so I hereby declare myself the winner of this little skirmish. Is that okay with you?

[seer]

Why? Are you feeling oppressed?

Not yet, yet being the key word here. But like I said FF, it is the left trying to shut down speech and punish those with opposing opinions. Fascism light is coming from the left - that is a fact, whether you see it or not.

[firstfloor]

Amazing how relevant de Tocqueville is even today...

Why? Are you feeling oppressed?
“I cannot help fearing that men may reach a point where they look on every new theory as a danger, every innovation as a toilsome trouble, every social advance as a first step toward revolution, and that they may absolutely refuse to move at all.”
- Alexis de Tocqueville

[Epoetker]

Correcting Firstfloor's exotic vocabulary now.

Being politically correct (if you are in the public eye) is not enough to satisfy our decadent elite because it just makes a person think they have to shut up about what they really think and our clients will be able to see through the deception. I think the point of education is to manufacture consent of issues that are disgusting to a person so that they can start to reassess their own employment prospects. The thing about bigotry is that the person displaying it thinks he is justified; that he is being realistic rather than bigoted. In education, that person will learn what he has misunderstood about offending the degenerates who we've favored.

Religious bigotry is very difficult to combat because the religious bigot is trained to not allow himself to be compromised. He finds it difficult to go past what will save him and his children.

I would say so. Bigotry is just another word for common sense. Religious common sense is the worst sort because it is destructively conservative. It does not easily learn new verbal tricks or new ways of reframing the world and is often slow to absorb new management jargon to justify the latest attempt to push the acceptance of moral ugliness on the public. The current gay marriage debate in Christianity is just one example of the problem of religiously inspired common sense in the world. Blasphemy and Apostasy are other big issues of the same type.

It seems that way because the LBGT movement is becoming more obnoxious and more bullying of common sense in political circles. Sodomy laws were repealed quite recently so it is still a relatively new phenomenon and as long as the honorable, innocent, or ignorant holdouts persists it will be quite noisy. But it amazes me that in the currently young generation it is heavily indoctrinated. They have responded to the only incentives we allow them and the fear of being fired on a whim even if we haven’t quite yet.

[Teallaura]

You might be. I would recommend a self test and try to avoid calling a bigot a bigot ‘cos they are likely to call you a bigot right back.
http://helloquizzy.okcupid.com/tests...ous-bigot-test

It's your definition - and you just proved again that you don't practice what you preach. Guess 'tolerance' is something you only demonstrate to those you agree with.

[Cerebrum123]

Is religious faith not considered virtuous because it is against reason? “For we live by faith, not by sight.” – 2 Corinthians 5:7

You don't understand the first thing about faith. Here's a little something that should help.

There is an in depth article here.

[seer]

I think this is a rather uncharitable evaluation of society. While I disagreed with the decision to remove Eich, I understood that people were upset because he'd actively contributed money towards a cause that they view as inherently discriminatory. It wasn't simply because he'd expressed an unpopular opinion. Besides, professional athletes like Torii Hunter and Adrian Peterson have publicly stated that they don't support gay marriage (with Hunter even saying that he'd feel uncomfortable playing with a gay teammate), but no disciplinary action was taken against them. That's precisely because they stated those views calmly and in a non-inflammatory manner. Compare these lines:

So what if he contributed money to support traditional marriage? That should be his right as a free citizen.

See the difference? Peterson and Hunter's statements still spark disagreement, but they aren't too offensive, and they suggest that some degree of thought was put into it. Jones' tweets, on the other hand, were knee-jerk reactions and had a tone of disgust. THAT truly is intolerant and harmful, and that's why he was disciplined. (I also agree with KingsGambit's earlier suggestion that the Dolphins' bullying scandal inspired management to take a stronger, swifter response.)

I think Jones' reaction to homosexual men french kissing is perfectly natural. And he still should have the right to express his disgust without fear of consequence.

[firstfloor]

I disagree. I think it is reason that is our biggest ally.

Is religious faith not considered virtuous because it is against reason? “For we live by faith, not by sight.” – 2 Corinthians 5:7