• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Walkout of Anti-Gay Event

It would depend....your scenario doesn't have enough facts. If it was a black man/panther who held very anti-white views and was speaking about that....then I think he would be the intolerant one. Bigotry has never been exclusively white.

Ok let's come at this from another angle. Remember that toolbag kid who went to Florida and got his dumb ass tased? Was that justified, or should they have just let him keep making an ass of himself?
 
Ok let's come at this from another angle. Remember that toolbag kid who went to Florida and got his dumb ass tased? Was that justified, or should they have just let him keep making an ass of himself?

I don't recall the case.....
 
I don't recall the case.....

You don't remember that kid? Clinton was there and the kid was just obsessed with asking him idiotic questions about Bush, creating a scene and eventually resisting? I'll find you a clip.

 
You don't remember that kid? Clinton was there and the kid was just obsessed with asking him idiotic questions about Bush, creating a scene and eventually resisting? I'll find you a clip.



I think he got off easy
 
I'm not sure what your question is? This doesn't really seem to fit in with the discussion we were having. With someone like this, whatever views they are espousing left/right...I think the people in charge of the forum have a right to at some point limit the agenda? I think you give people a couple of minutes and when it becomes clear that they aren't really there to participate in the forum, but rather there to perpetuate an agenda....I think they can be cut off.

If the question is about police use of force....I think it has to be evaluated based on the situation. If the person is physically resisting and the police need to use a taser to control the situation and keep it grom escalating, then the use of force is justified.
 
I'm not sure what your question is? This doesn't really seem to fit in with the discussion we were having. With someone like this, whatever views they are espousing left/right...I think the people in charge of the forum have a right to at some point limit the agenda? I think you give people a couple of minutes and when it becomes clear that they aren't really there to participate in the forum, but rather there to perpetuate an agenda....I think they can be cut off.

If the question is about police use of force....I think it has to be evaluated based on the situation. If the person is physically resisting and the police need to use a taser to control the situation and keep it grom escalating, then the use of force is justified.

I'm saying that there isn't always just black and white. The kid was forceful. The police were forceful. Who's right? Depends on perspective.

In the walkout, nobody was forceful. It was a private meeting, and a peaceful assembly. It was a family rights group listening to a family rights speaker, with a pro-gay group peacefully assembling and demonstrating, as per their Constitutional right.

No side was wrong.
 
I'm saying that there isn't always just black and white. The kid was forceful. The police were forceful. Who's right? Depends on perspective.

In the walkout, nobody was forceful. It was a private meeting, and a peaceful assembly. It was a family rights group listening to a family rights speaker, with a pro-gay group peacefully assembling and demonstrating, as per their Constitutional right.

No side was wrong.
I didn't say that there is always black/white. My comment was that in many cases, however, there is situations where one groups is almost always right and the other almost always wrong. Bigotry is an example of this.

In the situation of the subject matter of the thread, there absolutely was a right/wrong. The speaker spewing bigotry and hatred is no different than the bigots who spoke out against intergration or inter-racial marriage. Bigotry is never correct.
 
I didn't say that there is always black/white. My comment was that in many cases, however, there is situations where one groups is almost always right and the other almost always wrong. Bigotry is an example of this.

In the situation of the subject matter of the thread, there absolutely was a right/wrong. The speaker spewing bigotry and hatred is no different than the bigots who spoke out against intergration or inter-racial marriage. Bigotry is never correct.

Bigotry is multi-faceted. I've seen vicious hatred from gays against straights before. Hell, I've seen it on DP.

One man's bigotry is another man's viewpoint.
 
Bigotry is multi-faceted. I've seen vicious hatred from gays against straights before. Hell, I've seen it on DP.

One man's bigotry is another man's viewpoint.

Again....bigotry has never been exclusively white or straight or...... Gay people can be bigoted too. That doesn't change the fact that bigotry is not black/white....bigotry is always wrong. It is a waaaaaay oversimplification to claim that "One man's bigotry is another man's viewpoint". Bigotry is bigotry.....
 
Again....bigotry has never been exclusively white or straight or...... Gay people can be bigoted too. That doesn't change the fact that bigotry is not black/white....bigotry is always wrong. It is a waaaaaay oversimplification to claim that "One man's bigotry is another man's viewpoint". Bigotry is bigotry.....

There's a difference between being pro-family and anti-gay. I don't recall the speaker saying anything along the line of "kill all faggots".
 
There's a difference between being pro-family and anti-gay. I don't recall the speaker saying anything along the line of "kill all faggots".

Being bigoted does not require calling for the death of anybody
 
There's a difference between being pro-family and anti-gay. I don't recall the speaker saying anything along the line of "kill all faggots".

What is pro-family? I know many gay people who are "pro-family". The reality is...when it comes to these "pro-family" groups.....it is just a more palatable way of saying "anti-gay". Because they aren't really pro-family....they are pro-family as long as it doesn't involve gay people. That is just masked bigotry.
 
There's a difference between being pro-family and anti-gay. I don't recall the speaker saying anything along the line of "kill all faggots".

wrong again, "pro family" in this context is just a more acceptable way of saying "anti gay"

plenty of gays have families too so it's surely not meant literally
 
What is pro-family? I know many gay people who are "pro-family". The reality is...when it comes to these "pro-family" groups.....it is just a more palatable way of saying "anti-gay". Because they aren't really pro-family....they are pro-family as long as it doesn't involve gay people. That is just masked bigotry.

And all perceived bigotry should be quashed by government force, right? After all, bigots don't have rights...correct?
 
And all perceived bigotry should be quashed by government force, right? After all, bigots don't have rights...correct?

Government force? Laws are not the same as force.
Do bigots have rights? Absolutely....they have the same rights that we all enjoy. What they don't have a right to, however, is be free from the consequences of their bigotry.
 
wrong again, "pro family" in this context is just a more acceptable way of saying "anti gay"

plenty of gays have families too so it's surely not meant literally

My sister used to have a bumper sticker that said: Pro-child, Pro-family, Pro-gay, Pro-Choice.
 
And all perceived bigotry should be quashed by government force, right? After all, bigots don't have rights...correct?

He never said that, but you don't need to spend all your time sticking up for bigots either. That doesn't look so great
 
Government force? Laws are not the same as force.
Do bigots have rights? Absolutely....they have the same rights that we all enjoy. What they don't have a right to, however, is be free from the consequences of their bigotry.

What consequences? A pro-gay group picketed the meeting. I'm good with that.

What do you want - have the family values supporters shackled and beaten?
 
He never said that, but you don't need to spend all your time sticking up for bigots either. That doesn't look so great

I stick up for people's rights - and last I checked, bigots are people. So are racists, pedophiles, and <enter religion here>.
 
Okay...what's the tell-tale sign?

Judging others by what they are, instead of assessing them as an individual. Wanting selected others to be treated as second class citizens without all of the same rights as everyone else.
 
Judging others by what they are, instead of assessing them as an individual. Wanting selected others to be treated as second class citizens without all of the same rights as everyone else.

Loooooot of bigots out there then. Here too.
 
He never said that, but you don't need to spend all your time sticking up for bigots either. That doesn't look so great

Escpecially when he has to desperately grasp for some sort of argument. We've seen him argue that

1) Pro-family isn't anti-gay
2) Blacks can be bigoted
3) Gays can be bigoted
4) People are allowed to be bigoted
5) This guy didn't say anyone should be killed.

And all because dd made the obvious claim that bigotry is wrong.
 
Back
Top Bottom