What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Liberal Intolerance (1 Viewer)

MattFancy said:
I'm sure they aren't. But like I said, it's classified as an abortion. So if it's made illegal, my wife would have had to carry a baby to term knowing that there was nothing there. That's a tough thing to push on women going through something similar.
Click to expand...
Abortion has been legal for over 40 years. We have had republican presidents, congresses and a right-leaning supreme court and abortion is still legal, and it has been, uninterrupted since the SC ruled on this in 73.

Do you really think it's a legitimate concern it's going to get overturned because Trump was elected?

 
sublimeone said:
Abortion has been legal for over 40 years. We have had republican presidents, congresses and a right-leaning supreme court and abortion is still legal, and it has been, uninterrupted since the SC ruled on this in 73.

Do you really think it's a legitimate concern it's going to get overturned because Trump was elected?
Click to expand...
I honestly have no idea if it will be made illegal. He's talked about overturning Roe v Wade. I don't think it will be, but who knows?

And again, I'm not out there advocating women to get an abortion. I personally, don't agree with them, but I can certainly understand there being circumstances where people make that decision and I don't think it's up to the government to decide that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
sublimeone said:
Ask yourself a couple of questions:

1. Why didn't the left label Obama a bigot when he was against gay marriage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6K9dS9wl7U

2. Why didn't the left label Clinton a bigot when she was against gay marriage.

Why was the left patient and willing to give our leaders time to evolve but not ordinary citizens? People were and still are coming around but a big cultural change like this takes time, especially for older generations or those raised a certain way. Piling on and calling people bigots for supporting the same exact position Obama and Hillary had up until a couple years ago is absurd.
Click to expand...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tqy4cAQVzLU

 
Last edited by a moderator:
sublimeone said:
Abortion has been legal for over 40 years. We have had republican presidents, congresses and a right-leaning supreme court and abortion is still legal, and it has been, uninterrupted since the SC ruled on this in 73.

Do you really think it's a legitimate concern it's going to get overturned because Trump was elected?
Click to expand...
That's a little misleading. Legislation and cases since then have trimmed away at Roe (see e.g., Partial Birth Abortion Act). And now the latest Republican plan is to set up arbitrary, irrelevant requirements that force many clinics to close. Thus effectively eliminating abortion in large geographic areas. The S.Ct. struck down Texas's law on this - but it was a 5-3 decision.

So yes, I think the right to an abortion is very much under attack and it is a legitimate concern.

 
whoknew said:
That's a little misleading. Legislation and cases since then have trimmed away at Roe (see e.g., Partial Birth Abortion Act). And now the latest Republican plan is to set up arbitrary, irrelevant requirements that force many clinics to close. Thus effectively eliminating abortion in large geographic areas. The S.Ct. struck down Texas's law on this - but it was a 5-3 decision.

So yes, I think the right to an abortion is very much under attack and it is a legitimate concern.
Click to expand...
And that's where the debate takes place... but I don't think anyone really believes there's going to be an outright ban on abortion.

 
Rich Conway said:
Do you really see the OP as the above?  Again, that attitude is part of the reason Hillary lost.  At least make an effort to understand what the OP is saying.
Click to expand...
I don't have much of an opinion on sublimeone.  I have an opinion on the argument, which I think is largely bull####.

I've been called a libtard plenty of times on this board.  I've been called a lot worse.  I've had someone tell me I should have been tortured by Uday and Qusay Hussein.  I have never reported a single person.  It's fine.  It's words.  I tend to draw the line when your words are in support of actions that hurt people.  So I don't care if some idiot here calls gay people nancy boys.  I do care if that person thinks they should be denied basic human rights. 

But at the same time, I've also learned something.  The vast majority of people are not persuaded by reason and civility.  Obama has been a pretty reasonable and civil guy and Tea Partiers still showed up with Hitler posters and took offense at even the most benign things he said (such as his observation that many of the voters that Hillary lost voted against their economic self-interest while clinging to guns and religion).  And it's fine.  People can take offense out of whatever they want.  Because I don't shoulder the responsibility spreading "Liberal" philosophy I don't particularly care whether my remarks change people's minds or not.  If I spent this much time on this board in the belief I was changing minds it wouldn't just be kind of sad like it is now.  It would be scary and delusional.  So instead, I post to entertain myself when I'm bored but also in the most honest way I know how.  And that means that when I think someone is awful, I call them awful.

Donald Trump is definitely awful.  I don't know if everyone who voted for him is awful, but I know they decided that his awfulness didn't matter.  And I have opinions about how valid their reasons are.  If they truly believe that Hillary Clinton was objectively more awful, then yes, I think those people are idiots.  I'm perfectly comfortable saying that and letting them say what they wish about me.   

 
MattFancy said:
I'm sure they aren't. But like I said, it's classified as an abortion. So if it's made illegal, my wife would have had to carry a baby to term knowing that there was nothing there. That's a tough thing to push on women going through something similar.
Click to expand...
I'd say there's a compelling argument that this should be changed.

 
Only way we move forward is by addressing intolerance in general. When you preface it with a "liberal" or "conservative" it's hard to expect you're going to get much improvement in the situation you're hoping to discuss. You're just making an already emotionally charged situation worse. I'm a liberal. If people are feeling put upon, liberal or conservative, I'll listen. I don't promise to agree with you, but I'll do my best to understand you and reason with you. And I'll try not to ridicule. It's tough some times when you (think you) know you're right not to become condescending after a while. Not a good way to be though in general. I try to do better whenever I can.

I've had this conversation with my wife a bit the last few days. What this election has reinforced for me is that people put taking care of their own first, above any other consideration, when it comes to voting. Understanding that, I will not jump to calling all those who voted for Trump racist, homophobic, etc. They may be morally compromised, but as I said to my wife, if I was in their shoes, out of work, industries moving away or simply vanishing, community drying up, no hope in sight, I'd probably vote for the candidate who most seemed like they were going to help my situation, regardless of the baggage that comes with them. I don't know if putting yourself and/or your family first in that situation is legitimately morally compromised either.

I would say, that that does not lend itself to the assumption (stated by some in various threads here the last few days), that this election was somehow a definitive referendum on political correctness, bigotry, or any of those other soft issues. It was about jobs and hope. Trump promised those things in a more effective way than Clinton, and that resonated with enough people in key states to make the difference. This wasn't an affirmation of conservativism or a repudiation of liberalism, it was an assertion of populism, something absent of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, etc. I think we should all keep that in mind when we're seeking to engage people in these sorts of discussions.

 
Brunell4MVP said:
To those not willing to call him president, there are about 10-15 other countries on the planet worth living in.  Explore them, and note when you get there that their politics will amazingly not 100% agree with you either, but I'm guessing they will have a President or similar leader.
Click to expand...
I wonder how many of those similar leaders had no prior experience in public office.  You'd think they all probably won an election of some kind somewhere before they got their big shot.

 
MattFancy said:
Here's a scenario:

2 years ago, my wife had a miscarriage. Baby was 6 weeks old at the time. Waited another 2 weeks to see if the sono was off and still no heartbeat. Options were to let her body just push the baby out, but no idea how long that could take or to have a D & C. Went the D & C route to get the baby out and start our healing process. By the hospital, that was considered an abortion. Should my wife had to carry a baby that had no heart beat at 6 weeks for another 34 weeks?
Click to expand...
First, that sucks and I'm sorry to hear about this.

Second, I would not be opposed as it was not a living fetus.  I don't think anybody is against the scenario you unfortunately had to experience. 

 
MattFancy said:
Being tolerant of others is an important issue to me.
Click to expand...
While I think all reasonable people are in agreement with this, I think the acrimony and name calling these days has much to do with the term being redefined and misused.  Tolerance use to mean the ability to be adult, civil and respectful towards those with which we had some sizeable disagreement.  Now it means to endorse and approve a thing.  I continue to believe that marriage should be one man and one woman (for example), but I find it very easy to be a good neighbor, good co-worker, good family member, and so on, with those who not only think differently but make different life choices than me.  This is tolerance.  But, to the left, I am intolerant.  Not for my conduct or my speech, but for how I think.  It's unfortunate.

 
wormburner said:
But, to the left, I am intolerant.  Not for my conduct or my speech, but for how I think.  It's unfortunate.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't make that blanket statement. I'm liberal, and I don't find you intolerant as long as you're not imposing your beliefs on others.

 
wormburner said:
While I think all reasonable people are in agreement with this, I think the acrimony and name calling these days has much to do with the term being redefined and misused.  Tolerance use to mean the ability to be adult, civil and respectful towards those with which we had some sizeable disagreement.  Now it means to endorse and approve a thing.  I continue to believe that marriage should be one man and one woman (for example), but I find it very easy to be a good neighbor, good co-worker, good family member, and so on, with those who not only think differently but make different life choices than me.  This is tolerance.  But, to the left, I am intolerant.  Not for my conduct or my speech, but for how I think.  It's unfortunate.
Click to expand...
Allowing legal gay marriage isn't asking you to approve, but to agree that it's not your place to tell them they can't. Tolerance.

 
Gr00vus said:
I wouldn't make that blanket statement. I'm liberal, and I don't find you intolerant as long as you're not imposing your beliefs on others.
Click to expand...
Right on, Gr00vus.  My point wasn't the specific topic of marriage so much as how our culture seems to be throwing a wider net in defining intolerance these days.

 
MattFancy said:
Here's a scenario:

2 years ago, my wife had a miscarriage. Baby was 6 weeks old at the time. Waited another 2 weeks to see if the sono was off and still no heartbeat. Options were to let her body just push the baby out, but no idea how long that could take or to have a D & C. Went the D & C route to get the baby out and start our healing process. By the hospital, that was considered an abortion. Should my wife had to carry a baby that had no heart beat at 6 weeks for another 34 weeks?
Click to expand...
Absolutely not.  Sorry to hear you and your wife had to go through such an awful thing.  In that case you have to do what's right for you and your wife and let the healing begin.  My wife and I went through three miscarriages before having our first child, so I get that.

Its probably not a popular opinion on this board, but I lean to the pro-life side of this argument.  There was a point in my life where I was worried that we wouldn't be able to have children.  I'm sure that shapes my views a bit.  I can accept abortions for rape and the mother's health.  I'm strongly against abortions as a means of birth control.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
mrip541 said:
Allowing legal gay marriage isn't asking you to approve, but to agree that it's not your place to tell them they can't. Tolerance.
Click to expand...
Because I agree, but don't approve, that is 21st Century intolerance.  Ask the college age kids you know.  Tolerance requires an endorsement.

 
wormburner said:
Right on, Gr00vus.  My point wasn't the specific topic of marriage so much as how our culture seems to be throwing a wider net in defining intolerance these days.
Click to expand...
And my point is, you can't treat "the left" (or "the right", or any perceived set of people) as some monolithic thing that all thinks the same way. Doing so is a healthy component of intolerance, regardless of which ideas/beliefs are under discussion.

 
Gr00vus said:
And my point is, you can't treat "the left" (or "the right", or any perceived set of people) as some monolithic thing that all thinks the same way. Doing so is a healthy component of intolerance, regardless of which ideas/beliefs are under discussion.
Click to expand...
Will you agree that today's news is primarily filled with left-leaning people shouting obscenities and name calling those of us who don't share their world view?  Tolerance or intolerance?  As you say, this is not an indictment of every liberal, but they certainly have everyone's attention.

 
wormburner said:
While I think all reasonable people are in agreement with this, I think the acrimony and name calling these days has much to do with the term being redefined and misused.  Tolerance use to mean the ability to be adult, civil and respectful towards those with which we had some sizeable disagreement.  Now it means to endorse and approve a thing.  I continue to believe that marriage should be one man and one woman (for example), but I find it very easy to be a good neighbor, good co-worker, good family member, and so on, with those who not only think differently but make different life choices than me.  This is tolerance.  But, to the left, I am intolerant.  Not for my conduct or my speech, but for how I think.  It's unfortunate.
Click to expand...
Are you just saying that you consider marriage to be between one man and one woman or are you taking political action based on that belief?  Are you voting for anti gay marriage amendments?  Or voting for politicians who campaign for them?  Because this is the distinction.  At that point, you are not just stating a civil disagreement.  You are taking affirmative actions to petition the state to treat gay relationships as lesser to your own.  This does not make you a monster.  But it is intolerant.  It is, in the eyes of many people on my side, an immoral action.  Just as supporting abortion rights is viewed by many on your side as an immoral action. 

 
wormburner said:
Will you agree that today's news is primarily filled with left-leaning people shouting obscenities and name calling those of us who don't share their world view?  Tolerance or intolerance?  As you say, this is not an indictment of every liberal, but they certainly have everyone's attention.
Click to expand...
I'd call it more disappointed petulance than anything. Kind of like the worst of the tea party. Loudmouths get the most attention, doesn't mean their attitude represents that of everyone associated with a given group. I don't ascribe alt-right/neo-fascist rhetoric to all conservatives though that's where those folks choose to align themselves.

 
wormburner said:
Will you agree that today's news is primarily filled with left-leaning people shouting obscenities and name calling those of us who don't share their world view?  Tolerance or intolerance?  As you say, this is not an indictment of every liberal, but they certainly have everyone's attention.
Click to expand...
No, I wouldn't.  And it seems really weird to hear that from the "side" that made a guy a half-billionaire for coining the word "feminazi" back in the 90s. 

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Are you just saying that you consider marriage to be between one man and one woman or are you taking political action based on that belief?  Are you voting for anti gay marriage amendments?  Or voting for politicians who campaign for them?  Because this is the distinction.  At that point, you are not just stating a civil disagreement.  You are taking affirmative actions to petition the state to treat gay relationships as lesser to your own.  This does not make you a monster.  But it is intolerant.  It is, in the eyes of many people on my side, an immoral action.  Just as supporting abortion rights is viewed by many on your side as an immoral action. 
Click to expand...
I appreciate the distinction your offer, but I think you're making my point.  Without an endorsement, including the endorsement of other people I endorse (how I vote), you still come back to intolerance.

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
I don't have much of an opinion on sublimeone.  I have an opinion on the argument, which I think is largely bull####.

I've been called a libtard plenty of times on this board.  I've been called a lot worse.  I've had someone tell me I should have been tortured by Uday and Qusay Hussein.  I have never reported a single person.  It's fine.  It's words.  I tend to draw the line when your words are in support of actions that hurt people.  So I don't care if some idiot here calls gay people nancy boys.  I do care if that person thinks they should be denied basic human rights. 

But at the same time, I've also learned something.  The vast majority of people are not persuaded by reason and civility.  Obama has been a pretty reasonable and civil guy and Tea Partiers still showed up with Hitler posters and took offense at even the most benign things he said (such as his observation that many of the voters that Hillary lost voted against their economic self-interest while clinging to guns and religion).  And it's fine.  People can take offense out of whatever they want.  Because I don't shoulder the responsibility spreading "Liberal" philosophy I don't particularly care whether my remarks change people's minds or not.  If I spent this much time on this board in the belief I was changing minds it wouldn't just be kind of sad like it is now.  It would be scary and delusional.  So instead, I post to entertain myself when I'm bored but also in the most honest way I know how.  And that means that when I think someone is awful, I call them awful.

Donald Trump is definitely awful.  I don't know if everyone who voted for him is awful, but I know they decided that his awfulness didn't matter.  And I have opinions about how valid their reasons are.  If they truly believe that Hillary Clinton was objectively more awful, then yes, I think those people are idiots.  I'm perfectly comfortable saying that and letting them say what they wish about me.   
Click to expand...
This is a lot different than the leaders of the Democrat party going on TV and calling people names.  Not everyone who votes Republican is racist, sexist, or inbred.  But if "the left" continually refers to conservatives or Republicans that way, especially with blanket statements, it will breed resentment towards those doing the name calling.  Obviously, this works in reverse too.

 
wormburner said:
I appreciate the distinction your offer, but I think you're making my point.  Without an endorsement, including the endorsement of other people I endorse (how I vote), you still come back to intolerance.
Click to expand...
Voting for anti same sex marriage legislation is a manifestation of intolerance.

 
Rich Conway said:
This is a lot different than the leaders of the Democrat party going on TV and calling people names.  Not everyone who votes Republican is racist, sexist, or inbred.  But if "the left" continually refers to conservatives or Republicans that way, especially with blanket statements, it will breed resentment towards those doing the name calling.  Obviously, this works in reverse too.
Click to expand...
What leaders called people names?  I mean, the President-Elect called Hispanics rapists in literally his very first campaign event.  Hillary Clinton called a segment of Donald Trump's support deplorables and had to apologize even as they were selling "Trump That #####" shirts at Trump rallies.  So yeah, excuse me if I don't shed a tear about liberal incivility. 

 
Ok, the sequins are a bit overboard, but the guy knows how to entertain.

Wait, this isn't Liberace intolerance?  I'll show myself out.

 
BigSteelThrill said:
http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/education/index.ssf/2016/11/students_yelling_cotton_picker_heiling_hitler_at_this_local_school.html
Click to expand...
I see 0 mentions of Trump on that article and it happened pre-election. Are we going to start citing every stupid thing said by an isolated group of young teens as an indication of the population as a whole?

Key takeway...

District Superintendent Kathleen Evison emphasized Friday that only a small number of students used the "extremely inappropriate language" and they have been disciplined.

"Our student body is an extremely supportive and collaborative student body," Evison said. "This is very unusual for us to hear this kind of language and, obviously, very disturbing."
Click to expand...

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
No, I wouldn't.  And it seems really weird to hear that from the "side" that made a guy a half-billionaire for coining the word "feminazi" back in the 90s. 
Click to expand...
The news seems decidedly one-sided to me today.  Not a fan of Limbaugh, besides, Gr00vus has already spoken against lumping a "side" all together.  ;)

Gr00vus said:
Voting for anti same sex marriage legislation is a manifestation of intolerance.
Click to expand...
Same sex marriage is now the law of the land, I don't recall this issue being on my ballot Tuesday. 

 
Gr00vus said:
You read through all those posts, viewed all the pictures, watched all the videos - all fake? Tough to take you seriously if that's your response.
Click to expand...
I looked at many of them before closing the window. Several seem flimsy at best. Are they all? Probably not.

Is this confirmation bias for a narrative you want to believe is running rampant? Absolutely.

 
RnR said:
I looked at many of them before closing the window. Several seem flimsy at best. Are they all? Probably not.

Is this confirmation bias for a narrative you want to believe is running rampant? Absolutely.
Click to expand...
I don't want to believe it's running rampant. I'd much prefer things like that had never happened. I did not ascribe any of it to any particular large group. I'm just pointing out some instances of intolerance, ones which are a bit more problematic than disagreements on a message board. They serve as examples of why it's difficult to keep a clear head when going over the topic of intolerance.

However it is interesting that you felt the need to immediately dismiss all of it - why is that?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gr00vus said:
I don't want to believe it's running rampant. I did not ascribe any of it to any particular large group. I'm just pointing out some instances of intolerance, ones which are a bit more problematic than disagreements on a message board. They serve as examples of why it's difficult to keep a clear head when going over the topic of intolerance.

However it is interesting that you felt the need to immediately dismiss all of it - why is that?
Click to expand...
I posted a 3-second clip from a YouTube video. I'm not dismissing anything, I'm just not buying everything I see on the internet without verification. Much like there's the possibility that there are terrible people capable of doing such acts, there are also quite a few people that are angry about the result of the election and have a motive to create outrage with fake stuff on the internet. Welcome to 2016. :sadbanana:

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
What leaders called people names?  I mean, the President-Elect called Hispanics rapists in literally his very first campaign event.  Hillary Clinton called a segment of Donald Trump's support deplorables and had to apologize even as they were selling "Trump That #####" shirts at Trump rallies.  So yeah, excuse me if I don't shed a tear about liberal incivility. 
Click to expand...
I'm referring to Clinton and her basket of deplorables.  I'm referring to the constant barrage of opinion pieces on NYT, CNN, etc.  I'm referring to Rachel Maddow and others on MCNBC.

Look, I'm no Trump fan, and I didn't vote for him (living in a safe state, I had the luxury of voting my conscience without worrying about Trump).  As much as I despise Clinton, I would still rather have Clinton than Trump.  But, as an "outsider" (i.e. not tied to either party, not tied to Trump or Clinton), I'm simply trying to offer you a reason for what happened and the lesson Democrats might take going forward.  Any liberals, Democrats, or progressives taking the attitude of "screw those racist, sexist, inbred hicks" is learning the wrong lesson.

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
What leaders called people names?  I mean, the President-Elect called Hispanics rapists in literally his very first campaign event.  Hillary Clinton called a segment of Donald Trump's support deplorables and had to apologize even as they were selling "Trump That #####" shirts at Trump rallies.  So yeah, excuse me if I don't shed a tear about liberal incivility. 
Click to expand...
Are you a lawyer? If so, the way you presented this is a dead giveaway.

 
Gr00vus said:
That was the (hypothetical) context of the @Ramsay Hunt Experience post to which you were replying.
Click to expand...
Understood.  I'm not sure I've ever voted for someone who gave me 10/10 on the issues I hoped to see advanced.  If we follow the string of someone's decisions far enough, we will eventually find disagreement.  If we then ignore conduct and speech and define tolerance as a comparison of world views, nobody wins.,

 
Rich Conway said:
I'm referring to Clinton and her basket of deplorables.  I'm referring to the constant barrage of opinion pieces on NYT, CNN, etc.  I'm referring to Rachel Maddow and others on MCNBC.

Look, I'm no Trump fan, and I didn't vote for him (living in a safe state, I had the luxury of voting my conscience without worrying about Trump).  As much as I despise Clinton, I would still rather have Clinton than Trump.  But, as an "outsider" (i.e. not tied to either party, not tied to Trump or Clinton), I'm simply trying to offer you a reason for what happened and the lesson Democrats might take going forward.  Any liberals, Democrats, or progressives taking the attitude of "screw those racist, sexist, inbred hicks" is learning the wrong lesson.
Click to expand...
Rachel Maddow calls people names? She points out statements that are racist or sexist but I don't really recall her labeling anyone as such and I am certain she has never called anyone an "inbred".

 
RnR said:
I posted a 3-second clip from a YouTube video. I'm not dismissing anything, I'm just not buying everything I see on the internet without verification. Much like there's the possibility that there are terrible people capable of doing such acts, there are also quite a few people that are angry about the result of the election and have a motive to create outrage with fake stuff on the internet. Welcome to 2016. :sadbanana:
Click to expand...
Even if only one of those is real (and I'll continue to naively assume many if not all are), it's worth considering in this discussion.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
Devil in Disguise on Peacock - John Wayne Gacy
Replies
6
Views
166
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain
snellman
Class of 2026 support thread.
Replies
16
Views
475
FarFromHome
FarFromHome
Ministry of Pain
Alien: Earth on FX
2
Replies
82
Views
2K
dkp993
dkp993

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top