Look how tolerant they are!

[Cow Poke]

In my experience they seem to be used largely interchangeably.

Unless you just want to argue, in which case you can be a buttkuss and claim that you know better what somebody means than they do.

[Cow Poke]

That isn't what they have in mind when they use the term "bigots," however. They clearly mean something more like this:

a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

Legendary fail.

Which means, Grand Goofus, they the are INTOLERANT.

Catastrophic fail.

I tolerate you because I'm commanded to, not because I think you're worth it.

[JonathanL]

Sparko: "I'm going to make an annoying meme scolding hypocritical people for not being tolerant themselves!"

*is so intolerant of me that he won't even look at my post

1. Being tolerant of someone originally meant being able to live alongside them even though you disagree with them, it did not necessitate you to engage in dialogue with them. Sparko as an owner of this site is allowing you to espouse your viewpoints here even though he seems to largely disagree with you, which means that he is in fact, being tolerant of you.

2. You don't know if he read your post.

3. Stop misusing asterisks!

[Zymologist]

You and I are interacting with completely different people, I guess.

In all seriousness, do you interact with people who actually specifically mention "intolerance?"

I don't actually do that much interaction, but yeah, I've seen "intolerance" specifically mentioned. Anyway, just my experience.

Btw, it'd be kind of weird if you and I were interacting with the same people, wouldn't it?

[fm93]

In my experience they seem to be used largely interchangeably.

You and I are interacting with completely different people, I guess.

In all seriousness, do you interact with people who actually specifically mention "intolerance?"

[Zymologist]

Certainly, but the first part, which is what people usually focus on when they use the word "bigot," doesn't necessitate that.

In my experience they seem to be used largely interchangeably.

[fm93]

So if someone refuses to accept the members of a particular group, wouldn't you say that they're intolerant of that particular group?

Certainly, but the first part, which is what people usually focus on when they use the word "bigot," doesn't necessitate that.

[Zymologist]

That isn't what they have in mind when they use the term "bigots," however. They clearly mean something more like this:

a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

Legendary fail.

So if someone refuses to accept the members of a particular group, wouldn't you say that they're intolerant of that particular group?

[fm93]

Bigot: a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

EPIC fail

That isn't what they have in mind when they use the term "bigots," however. They clearly mean something more like this:

a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

Legendary fail.

[fm93]

That's what I thought

Sparko: "I'm going to make an annoying meme scolding hypocritical people for not being tolerant themselves!"

*is so intolerant of me that he won't even look at my post

[Ana Dragule]

John 15:18 “If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they kept My word, they will keep yours also. 21 But all these things they will do to you for My name’s sake, because they do not know Him who sent Me.

[Cow Poke]

I see plenty of gay rights supporters calling conservative Christians bigots and homophobes, but I don't actually see them calling Christians intolerant.

Bigot: a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

EPIC fail

[Sparko]

BLARP!

That's what I thought

[fm93]

I think it is very telling that when Christians do something that radical liberals and homosexuals don't like, they make a huge deal about it and say "Look how evil and intolerant Christians are" - and when radical liberals and homosexuals do something like this and terrorize Christians, their response is "yeah maybe they went a bit too far, but who can blame them? Christians are so evil and intolerant"

Okay, first of all, the groups who support gay rights extend far beyond merely "radical liberals" and gay people. Moderate liberals, moderates, independents, and even some conservatives (such as the Log Cabin Republicans) support gay rights as well, and many of those people are straight.

Second of all, who in the world are you conversing with that actually mentions "tolerance" as a point of argument? I see plenty of gay rights supporters calling conservative Christians bigots and homophobes, but I don't actually see them calling Christians intolerant. It's probably the term that gets thrown around the least, but you focus on it as if it's the one used the most.

Finally, no one in this thread has said anything remotely similar to that, so I have no clue what the relevance of that last post was.

[Paprika]

You're not saying anything constructive or even making an argument for/against anything. You're just looking for an opportunity to spit in the faces of those who support an intellectual position that you disagree with...
So yeah, basically going "HA! Look at these people who support gay rights and act badly!" is weak and accomplishes nothing.

On the contrary, winning on the moral level by painting the opposition as hateful bigots has been crucial to the victory of the progressives.

Pointing out that most progressives are evil in their progressiveness serves as equivalent counter-balance, which is why fm93 is trying to disqualify it.