Well, let's take a closer look, not sure you and I are talking about the same thing. Help me understand precisely how you come to this claim of bigotry.
Here is his quote:
"You guys long ago lost the right to claim you are the party of law and order."
He was inferring that ALL 'righties' claim that they are the party of law and order from the fact that SOME 'righties' make that claim. That is a logical fallacy known as the compositional error fallacy. IF that fallacy involves people as the class, as this example clearly does, then it is a special form of that fallacy, called bigotry. IF that fallacy involves people as the class AND a genetic trait as the property, then it is a special form of that fallacy, called racism. Racism and bigotry are both logical fallacies. They stem from the compositional error fallacy, as I have described above.
That's why his claim was a bigoted claim.
Bigotry means intolerance of those who do not agree with you or who are not like you, who do not believe as you believe.
No, it doesn't. Intolerance is not bigotry, and has NOTHING to do with bigotry. You can even be tolerant of a person and STILL make a bigoted claim about them. Bigotry is a logical fallacy, as I have described above. Bigotry is defined by Logic, not by any dictionary nor 'holy link'.
Intolerance, i.e., 'bigotry' means a lot more than just disagreeing with someone, it means you are willing to take action against those people, legally or illegally.
The willingness or non-willingness to 'take action' against someone is irrelevant. Bigotry is bigotry, regardless of one's actions/motives/tolerance/etc... Bigotry is an error of logic (a logical fallacy).
For example, if you are a hot dog vendor and you refuse to serve a republican because you don't like republicans, you then rise to the level of being a bigot, not just disagreeing with them, but taking action against them, that is intolerance.
Yes, your example is an example of bigotry, but not for the reason you think it is. The bigotry in this case has NOTHING to do with that person's "intolerance" or "dislike" towards Republicans, nor their action to not serve them. The bigotry here is because this person is inferring that {insert truth claim here} is true for THE WHOLE [all Republicans] from the fact that it happens to be true for some PART of the whole [some Republicans, a particular type of Republican, etc.] ... That is a compositional error fallacy involving people as the class. That is what bigotry is... If he were to involve a genetic trait of some sort, then he would also be a racist.
Where is the intolerance you are referring to?
There doesn't need to be any. See my arguments above.
Bongsaway, no doubt, by observing the right's support of Trump, who is breaking laws ( okay, not indicted or convicted, but he was listed as co-conspirator in one specific crime, this much we do know ), by the rights support of Roy Moore, and a few others of this ilk, made a general statement that the right lost it's right to claim it is the party of law and order by virtue of these observations. Right or wrong, it's just an opinion. That doesn't equal "bigot".
And now YOU are making several bigoted claims... Not all of the right supports Trump (see the "Never Trumpers"), not all of the right supported Roy Moore (some wanted him to drop out), and not all Republicans think that only they support law and order (which itself would be a bigoted position to take)...
I'm not interested in YOUR bigotry either...
It's one thing to disagree with a group, but intolerance means real action. For example, if bongsaway supported a law that would deny anyone who disagrees with bongsaway the right to vote, that would be intolerance.
He would also be supporting a law that would be unconstitutional...
So, where is your evidence of intolerance? Where is your evidence of Bigotry?
See above. You don't understand what bigotry actually is, nor where the definition for bigotry stems from.
