Jon Stewert: There is no more fight between left and right, only extremist and moderates...

It will always be between Conservatives and Liberals.

 

But if it has never happened to you, why does it bother you so? Life is hard enough without us imposing further complications on it.

It bothers me that people have the nerve to be so inconsiderate of other people's beliefs or lack thereof.

 

It bothers me that people have the nerve to be so inconsiderate of other people's beliefs or lack thereof.


Kind of like when someone comes up to you and says "I'm gay, and you better respect me for it. Oh, by the way my name is ..." Regardless of whether or not you are accepting of that lifestyle.

 

Thats totally different, people are not accepting of being gay are simply ignorant, they are basically the same as those who dislike people because of skin color, they should join the KKK and be jerks.

 

Since when do people not have the right to be left alone in their ignorance?

 

Thats totally different, people are not accepting of being gays are simply ignorant, they are basically the same as those who dislike people because of skin color, they should join the KKK and be jerks.


No, it is not. People who are not accepting of gay may have reasons to be so. Such as being molested as a child by a homosexual. Granted that is an unfair reason to not approve of all homosexuals, but if the emotional scaring is there, they are entitled to their opinion. If they have religious reasonings, they are entitled to that as well.


I find it interesting, Penguin that you are very vocal in condemning people for being intolerant, but once someone mentions being against approval of homosexuals, you become exactly what you were upset with on the board: intolerant.

 

It's all right to not accept people, as long as you keep it to yourself. But it's rude and inconsiderate, for example, to go up to an athiest if you are a very religious person, and say "I hate you, you will burn in hell," or to go up to a gay person if you are not gay, and say "You are disgusting and I hate you for being gay," or anything like that.

 

I most definitely agree. That is not in question, what I am concerned about is people saying that incidents of that nature upset them, when in fact, by their own admittance, it has never happened to them.


I will reiterate as a Christian, and a VERY FLAWED ONE AT THAT, it is not appropriate, nor is it in the following of Christ's teachings, to force your beliefs on someone.

If you want to hear my beliefs I will tell you, if you don't I will respect your wishes.


Please keep in mind that the reason individuals like Falwell are on TV is to see their own face and hear their own voice. It is these few individuals that cast a gloom on the entirety of Christianity.

 

That is not in question, what I am concerned about is people saying that incidents of that nature upset them, when in fact, by their own admittance, it has never happened to them.

Because when I hear about something like that, I think about how awful it would be if it happened to me. I am a nonreligious person (agnostic, I guess) so I would feel really offended if someone with Falwell-like views told me how I was going to burn in hell.

 

Well, I have to say that your idea of what's "awful" is a bit different than a lot of people.

 

It's awful because it's invading another person's right to decide how to live their life. And it digusts me that people find it acceptable.

It's not the most awful thing in the world, no. But there are different degrees of awful and this is one of them.

 

I'm surprised that my question managed to (sort of) sidetrack this thread so much. But then, we are still discussing extremists here, so I guess that's OK.

Because when I hear about something like that, I think about how awful it would be if it happened to me. I am a nonreligious person (agnostic, I guess) so I would feel really offended if someone with Falwell-like views told me how I was going to burn in hell.

I can understand that viewpoint. I am a Christian and I still get told that I'm going to "burn in hell" because I'm not the "right type" of Christian (So what if I'm LDS? I still believe in Christ.). It really hurts (not to mention gets frustrating and annoying) to run into people like that.

At the same time, I often got confused while serving a mission for my church because people would accuse me of trying to force my beliefs on them, just because I offered (not demanded) to share a message with them. I never told people that they would go to hell if they didn't accept (rather, I believe that they are just missing out on more blessings they could receive). Too many people seem to think that just the act of knocking on someone's door is an attempt to force your beliefs on them.

But then, I guess I must just be some sort of religious fanatic. I mean, I gave up two years of my life to serve my church in what seemed to be a foreign country (Las Vegas, working with the Hispanics there), and I even paid my own way in that time. I guess that makes me an extremist by default.

Kimball Kinnison

 

"It's awful because it's invading another person's right to decide how to live their life."


Balogna.

The hateful speech you are talking about is covered under freedom of speech, and I find it extremely condescending of you to say that you have a right to not hear anything you disagree with that supercedes another's right to freedom of speech. That's ridiculous.

Lighten up, and laugh at the person who does that to you if you are such an atheist. But don't wish for a society with thought police to protect you from hearing someone elses decision on how to live their own life.

 

Lighten up, and laugh at the person who does that to you if you are such an atheist. But don't wish for a society with thought police to protect you from hearing someone elses decision on how to live their own life.

Okay, this is something we need to clear up on these boards. Every time anyone suggests PEOPLE need to moderate their behavior, some of you reinterpret it to mean we want the GOVERNMENT to moderate their behavior.

This bugs me to death. My complaints about people not being responsible enough for their own behavior are interpreted as "liberal hippie crap" by - I'm sorry, but it's always conservatives who just don't get that I want people to grow up and act like human beings, and I know the government is powerless to make them do that.

By reinterpreting our statements to mean, "Oooh, Feds, save me from mean people!" you devalue the value of personal responsibility. The govt cannot legislate morals, ethics or tolerance. But we can let people know we don't appreciate their forceful expression - that's our freedom of speech.

 

Whenever someone makes the comment about religious people that ?they are always trying to FORCE their beliefs on me/others!?, I get this surreal picture in my mind of folks scampering out of a church to drag hapless passers-by off the street to the alter, where they hold them at knifepoint screaming ?BELIEVE!!!!?

I know of no place of worship at the present time where this happens, and I fail to see how the threat "you're going to burn in hell" can be considered forceful enough to change a truly non-believer's mind, unless they have some tiny shred of insecurity that the guy might be right.

Anyone soliciting anything can be annoying if they're too pushy and you're not interested. That certainly doesn't mean all Fuller Brush salesmen were pushy jerks, or that all religious people are overbearingly intolerant of non-believers. To both you simply say "no, thank you" (however forcefully you must without being mean), and move along.

 

Jon Stewart = The dude, not as good as Hal tho.

 

I think we need to define terms a bit more.

There are religious people, and then there are mentally ill people (usually schizophrenic and/or paranoid delusional) who are drawn to the terrifying aspects of a religion (such as the events of the Second Coming in Revelations). To a non-Christian unfamiliar with Christians in general, the difference between the two may unfortunately not be apparent.

IMHO, the forceful proseletyzers -those who grab your arm, hold onto it and yell at you, or tell young kids their parents are going to hell (yes, I've seen all this firsthand), that sort of thing - are probably mentally ill people who have found Christianity more to suit their paranoid delusions than out of sincere belief. Note the emphasis on hellfire and damnation - all the temptations are "out to get you", and they can tell you exactly which president the Beast is, etc. All very similar to a guy at a bus stop rambling on about the aliens controlling the chip in his head, and the CIA covering it up.

I don't know what the other posters have witnessed or experienced. I've had proseletyzers yell at me in a particularly rude and overly personal manner, and defended myself by calling them "Pharisee" (a group of Jews Jesus criticized for turning their prayers into public spectacles to "look good" instead of really practicing faith) and basically dishing it right back at 'em. I've never had to insult a salesperson to get him or her to go away - but that's because their sales pitch isn't "powered by paranoia".

That's my theory anyway. If you got anything anti-Christian out of it, either I wasn't clear or you're misreading me. All I'm trying to get across is that proseletyzers CAN be a little more aggressive than salesmen, simply because they're slightly more deranged.

 

It seems that this thread has gone well off its original course.

I certainly don't want to lock the thread, as discussion is going well. At the same tme, the thread title doesn't seem to fit anymore. Would anyone be adverse to me adapting it to better fit the current discussion?

 

That woman on Daily Show the other nite, long have I watched her, on CNBC and CNN....she's nuts. Sadly, the reason she gets on most of those shows is b/c she is supposed to represent the conservative viewpoint, and the liberal shows want to make the conservative viewpoint look laughable, which granted, it sometimes is, so they stick her on. I'm not sure if Conservative shows do this to liberal, I cant' think of examples right now, Fox is the only thing I can think of, I don't watch it enough to know if they use this same immoral strategy.

Instead of putting on someone with sanity, calm and intelligence that can defend their conservative viewpoint, many TV shows put on the dumbest sounding right-wing freak they can find, in order to make all conservatives look bad.

Which leads me to my next point, PHONY LIBERALS. I am a liberal, not necessarily a democrat, but nothing pisses me off more politcally, besides perhaps ultra-conservatives, are phony liberals. What do I mean by phony liberals? I mean hypocrites, people who pretend to be liberal in order to maintain public support from those that support them (ie, actors, media realize they can NOT afford to be anti-liberal), yet secretly support anything but liberal ideals.

For instance, the school I am attending next year is basically the most expensive in the country, but I have no choice, b/c I want to go to a film school, and one in the area. The Dean talked about how he wouldn't be run by "old Conservative men". Meanwhile, the Dean is the white, old, male head of a college that charges more than any other school in the country. That huge price ensures that disenfranchised and less fortunate people have no chance of attending their school. The Dean, while desperately trying to pretend to be liberal knowing that many students going there are liberal, is really nothing but someone supporting a constant cycle of social darwinism, unequal oppurtunities, etc. that exist within America. As long as knowledge costs money, there will be social class problems in our country. Tuition should be free, room and board is another thing, but no one should have to pay for education.

My father made a lot of money and worked hard, and I've taken advantage of that a ton, which in a sense makes me a hypocrit, but I'm not in the real world yet. But once I get out of college, I hope to use films in order to bring down things such as Universities that overcharge, and people in the entertainment and media industries that pretend to be liberal but really have no intention of being that.

 

the liberal shows want to make the conservative viewpoint look laughable, which granted, it sometimes is, so they stick her on. I'm not sure if Conservative shows do this to liberal, I cant' think of examples right now, Fox is the only thing I can think of, I don't watch it enough to know if they use this same immoral strategy.

I believe they all do this, and this is a very good observation you've made. I started noticing this years ago, only because I had heard about how, during the Quota System/Affirmative Action years, some employers who resented having to hire women, blacks, etc. went out of their way to hire the least qualified ones they could find to "demonstrate" how bad the Quota System was.

It's a very subtle way of making the other side look awful while still appearing to give them fair representation (and it does comply with the Federal requirement of "equal time for opposing viewpoints").

Geraldo Rivera is the worst offender I've seen. His show on MSNBC was a sort of Jerry Springer for the DC inbreeders or something.

 

Treecave, I will agree with you that it is possible that overly aggressive proselytizers are, perhaps a little out of it. They can also sometimes be nasty, as one was that insulted a co-worker of mine (had what she said been on a BB, it would have been considered trolling, in that he is Jewish and her remark was about a recently deceased rabbi). But I don't want to keep the thread off topic, so I'll just leave it at that.

As for the topic, I personally like Ann Coulter. I like people who have brash, gut-punch observations on squeamish topics that leave most peole morally paralyzed. Her opinions remind me of a more bare-bones Cal Thomas, who was once chastized by a liberal saying "The problem with conservatives is that they have simple answers for complex problems". Cal responded with "The problem with liberals is that they've ignored the simple answers, and that's why the problems have become so complex".

 

The hateful speech you are talking about is covered under freedom of speech, and I find it extremely condescending of you to say that you have a right to not hear anything you disagree with that supercedes another's right to freedom of speech. That's ridiculous.

Is it too much to expect, without having any laws of the sort, that other human beings will show more restraint in what they say? *Sighs*

 

"Tuition should be free, room and board is another thing, but no one should have to pay for education. "

You realize that is impossible, unless teachers all volunteer to work for nothing. I assume you mean education should be 100% government subsidized, but that would mean all taxpayers would be paying for education, not that nobody would be.

This is one major problem with "liberal utopian" ideals - people think they have inherent rights to things that, if they were granted, would violate someone else's rights (i.e. a teacher's right to earn a living).

The world doesn't owe anyone anything.

 

Is it too much to expect, without having any laws of the sort, that other human beings will show more restraint in what they say?

Excellent point! I often think this when riding on a bus next to people who can't carry on a conversation without loudly gossiping and cussing. Of course there are other times it'd be nice if people would think before they open their mouth, but this is the first example that comes to my mind.

Anyway, bravo. Wish more people thought this way.