General Chat Thread, God help us - UKIP councillor blames storms and floods on gay marriage.... in General; It is clear to me that the real meaning of "tolerance" has been lost to an entire generation. Tolerance does ...
20th January 2014, 10:08 AM #16
It is clear to me that the real meaning of "tolerance" has been lost to an entire generation. Tolerance does not mean agreement, it in fact means disagreement with something (a point of view, a lifestyle, etc.), but allowing it to exist anyway. As in not trying to persecute or imprison people holding that view.
The Latin word 'tolerare' that we derived the word tolerate from meant "to bear, to endure (often associated with pain)". So, to say that you will only tolerate something that you find somewhat agreeable or rational is an oxymoron.
So, when many people use the word "tolerance" what they really mean is "agreement with". In which case, you find most people to be intolerant of many things.
20th January 2014, 10:13 AM #17
Good example being our current Pope. I haven't read too much into it but from what I can understand from other people is he's doing a reasonable job in trying to increase acceptance regardless of someone's status. Not agreement of course, due to religion but still happy to point out we're all human, atheist, catholic, agnostic, jedi, whatever.
Last edited by synaesthesia; 20th January 2014 at 10:19 AM.
20th January 2014, 10:38 AM #18
I have never understood why some people take such umbrage at other people's happiness.
As posted by the fabulous George Takei on Facebook t'other day:
8 Thanks to sonofsanta:
achedgy (20th January 2014), ButterflyMoon (20th January 2014), gmonks (20th January 2014), Greenbeast (20th January 2014), Little-Miss (20th January 2014), LosOjos (20th January 2014), Rawns (20th January 2014), sparkeh (20th January 2014)
20th January 2014, 10:52 AM #19
I've always tried to think of myself as an open person, tolerant of the views of others. But denying someone's rights based on sexual orientation? Nuh-uh. Although I won't be confrontational or aggressive about it, I won't stand for it either. I welcome people to discuss their views with me, but unfortunately nobody has ever given me a better reason than "Because religion" or "Because I just don't agree with it", the latter never being expanded upon.
I don't agree with the recent badger cull because it needlessly puts them through harm, and there was no conclusive link between badgers and bovine tuberculosis.
I don't agree with parents that don't vaccinate their children because it puts their health at risk when there's no reasonable medical evidence for doing so.*
The thing is, it's the 'because' that makes the opinion valid, in my eyes. Even if your justification is biased or even completely incorrect, it's better than 'just because' (which is also what I consider the religious approach to be, more on that later). A biased or incorrect justification leaves your opinion open for debate. It's that justification that allows me to discuss your opinion (and, of course, my justification that allows you to discuss mine) and through this we may be able to reach a mutually better understanding.
"I don't agree with homosexuality because I feel it goes against the nature of our species. As any species evolves, one of their functions is, without fail, the ability to propagate itself.'
Now that I'd debate with. Admittedly I wouldn't agree with it, but I'd be more than willing to have an adult and mature discussion if somebody gave me that as their reasoning. Thing is, I've never heard that. I've never had somebody able to qualify why they feel how they feel. I've had "Well, it's just wrong, isn't it?".. Well why is it wrong? Can you justify it? I've heard "$religion says it's wrong", but again, why is it wrong? And have you properly evaluated that information and come to your own conclusion?
I don't want to sound like I'm religion-bashing. Whilst not religious myself, I respect other peoples rights to their spiritual beliefs of every and all kinds. But please, stop using your beliefs to infringe upon others rights. If you don't like the fact that people are homosexual, that's fine - we all don't have to like everything everybody else does. But can we please, please start judging people on their moral choices, rather than their sexual orientation?
Imagine what would happen if you showed up at a wedding venue, with your soon-to-be husband-or-wife, and the priest decided "You may now kiss the br- Oh. Wait. You're straight? No, sorry. Can't do this. You're not allowed, because you like the opposite sex. Get out, you filthy breeders!". Would that be fair? What if you got into your car, leaned out of your window and kissed your significant other goodbye for the day - and then your neighbour started declaring that the thunderstorm that was about to set in was because you were straight? Is that fair? No? So why should it be okay the other way around?
*I was never given the whooping cough vaccine because our family has a history of complications with it, which has resulted in fatalities. I was given every other vaccine when I was younger, though.
Last edited by Garacesh; 20th January 2014 at 11:52 AM.
5 Thanks to Garacesh:
ButterflyMoon (20th January 2014), gmonks (20th January 2014), Greenbeast (20th January 2014), sonofsanta (20th January 2014), sparkeh (20th January 2014)
20th January 2014, 10:57 AM #20
The problem with the concept of tolerance is that when the person spouting the rhetoric 'to be tolerated' is in some position of influence and should be capable of sensible and dispassionate discussion.
20th January 2014, 11:11 AM #21
The bible is quite clear on this:-
It doesn't mention God sending floods or anything, just that Gays should be put to death. Then again, the bible does say a whole host of other things that in today's society should be treated with ridicule to the highest degree. And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
20th January 2014, 11:12 AM #22
ukip Sure do know how to make headlines. Unfortunately I can only see this gaining them more supporters from the nutcases out there. The creation of the @ukipweather account on twitter however has given me a right old laugh so I guess it all balances out. We all know he's both wrong and a bigot!
20th January 2014, 11:14 AM #23
But Christianity doesn't follow the Old Testament any more does it?
Originally Posted by Andrew_C
Homosexual marriage is the only thing I've had a blazing row with one of my colleagues over in 8 years working with them, it really gets me riled up.
I can't believe that UKIP is still seen as a serious party - its near enough weekly that one of their councillors comes out with something from the middle ages. They're just an absurdity with no sensible policies.
Last edited by localzuk; 20th January 2014 at 11:21 AM.
20th January 2014, 11:24 AM #24
2 examples from the new testament found on a US deep south fundamentalist web page
1 Cor 6:9-10
Times change and I feel that if Jesus was around today he would embrace these people as he did the beggers and cripples etc.. The thing with the old/new testament and the letters of the apsotles is that they represent change in ideas, its just that we've stopped adding to the offical 'manual'
20th January 2014, 11:26 AM #25
This doesn't actually say that gays should be put to death, it says that men who have sexual intercourse with other men should be put to death. Do you need to have sex to have a healthy relationship? Christians would largely have you believe that no, you don't.
Originally Posted by Andrew_C
That being said, hypocrisy from christianity is hardly suprising.
Last edited by Sdrawkcab; 20th January 2014 at 11:30 AM.
20th January 2014, 11:34 AM #26
So, who do we have to hate to get some snow around here??
But seriously, what a numptie!
20th January 2014, 11:49 AM #27
People who say homosexuality isn't normal only need to look at nature. It's been observed in over 150 different species.
Thanks to gmonks from:
Greenbeast (20th January 2014)
20th January 2014, 11:57 AM #28
Does that make it normal though or just a behavior caused by other environmental pressures?
Originally Posted by gmonks
20th January 2014, 11:58 AM #29
So things caused by environmental pressures aren't normal?
Originally Posted by E_G_R2
20th January 2014, 12:01 PM #30
I don't know, lets start with a definition of Normal and then take it from there? Or we could just say lets not bother because in the end the UKIP bloke is a total w*nker and as un christian as a christian can get
By Dos_Box in forum General EduGeek News/Announcements
Last Post: 16th June 2009, 03:06 PM
By PEO in forum Wireless Networks
Last Post: 28th August 2008, 11:17 AM
By tosca925 in forum How do you do....it?
Last Post: 27th June 2008, 12:41 AM
By standunstan in forum Windows
Last Post: 21st March 2006, 10:46 PM
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)