Also, if we tolerate intolerance and permit demonstrably evil thoughts and deeds to be treated with the same gravitas and respect accorded to demonstrably just or altruistic thoughts and deeds, wherefore do the latter? And what does the word "tolerance" come to mean when it encompasses both itself and its polar opposite?
Not that I give a ***, mind you, because I don't preach tolerance. I preach respect, which is a social currency one earns and forfeits by how one operates within the context of human society and culture. Tolerance is a cheap dodge as amply demonstrated by the bigoted shitstains effortlessly employing it to justify imposing their irrational and insupportable nonsense on any person or group they perceive as being sufficiently weak as to be incapable of fighting back. Tolerance is walking up to a bully and standing still while he repeatedly punches you in the face saying, "Quit hitting yourself." Respect is castrating him.
Chick-Fil-A Scandal V2.0 With Firefox CEO
Chick-Fil-A Scandal v2.0 with Firefox CEO
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
You must want this "tact" nonsense involved because, what, it makes you feel morally superior to the mouth-breathing *** who neither care what you think of them nor will alter their opinions regardless of how pleasantly they are engaged in debate. There is measurably no incentive to play nice after one's opponent has made it abundantly clear that they never shall.
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
You are trying too damn hard to equate both sides that you don't even see how you're making yourself a doormat for the bigoted nutjobs. That phrase isn't a double standard. It's a simple fact. LGBTs aren't immune from criticism. IN FACT, bans on them getting married and laws allowing open discrimination of its members are quite the outspoken criticism, wouldn't you say?. But let's ignore that and please consider the bigot's feelings. I mean, it really is so awful how the once proud marginalizers are now being marginalized themselves, sad face :(
Go ask the women's suffrage movement and the civil rights movement how rights are earned through politely asking for permission. Does this mean an all-out attack? No. But when people, such as this CEO, actively engage in activism that seeks to limit the rights of a certain subset of people for no *** reason other than ***-headed bigotry, then it should not be seen as an affront when the push back is equally as aggressive. This type of discriminatory thinking is not just another opinion that needs to be respected and considered along with such other ideas as, I dunno, not being a homophobic twit. It's a viewpoint that belongs in the trash heap of history along with racism, sexism, and all the other good -isms so excuse me if I don't pour a 40 out on the pavement every time one of these *** reaps what he sows.
[+]
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
Lol, you can't even defend what he said. So yeah, it's garbage. Just having an opinion does not magically grant it merit, sorry. Some opinions are stupid and should be called out as such.
LoL and your hypocritical bigot. You cant stand that someone from within the LGBT community putting you on blast so you respond with LOL LOL LOL.
Cynical bitchy banter works well on internet doesn't work too well in real life hate to inform you.
In other words, you can't defend the indefensible. I couldn't care less if you're within the community. You're asking me to see merit in an argument that has exactly none and asking me to be respectful for a platform that has shown no respect to LGBTs in their activism.
Oh and you put me on par with the WBC so kindly *** yourself, kkthx ^^
Oh and you put me on par with the WBC so kindly *** yourself, kkthx ^^
[+]
Calling people who put down those who are intolerant as intolerant is a logical fallacy and a shame tactic that has no merit.
edit: belonging to a discriminated against group doesn't automatically make your argument win, you still have to back it up.
Hell there was plenty of African-Americans that thought they shouldn't fight for their rights and that they should leave well enough alone, they were still stupid.
edit: belonging to a discriminated against group doesn't automatically make your argument win, you still have to back it up.
Hell there was plenty of African-Americans that thought they shouldn't fight for their rights and that they should leave well enough alone, they were still stupid.
[+]
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: »
Cynical bitchy banter works well on internet doesn't work too well in real life hate to inform you.
Can't even compare this a little bit to the way women's suffrage and civil rights were achieved. They were achieved by opening people's minds and winning over people's hearts, not by bullying people into submission and ruining people's lives. No one likes a bully and that is exactly what a certain militant segment if the LGB population does. People may shy away from the fight with a bully but they never accept them. They just all think the bully is an ***.
If you don't seek to ever be overwhelmingly accepted than keep terrorizing people. Should take a page out if Dr King's book and don't cheapen his movement by comparing his work to that of these horrible people ruing the life work and careers of other people.
If you don't seek to ever be overwhelmingly accepted than keep terrorizing people. Should take a page out if Dr King's book and don't cheapen his movement by comparing his work to that of these horrible people ruing the life work and careers of other people.
[+]
Eich ruined his own career.
You hypocrites are the ones who constantly whine that people need to take responsibility for their lives and actions instead of crying that everyone else gets all the breaks. But, then, when someone suffers the direct consequences of his actions (a suffering he should have received years ago from his employer before it could become national news), suddenly you pitch a fit that they shouldn't be held responsible for things like voluntary actions. It must be nice to be able to alter your schtick to match your prejudice without even recognizing the about-face turn.
As for the "winning over people's hearts" line about suffrage and Civil Rights... revisionist comedy gold. Next you'll tell me that Auschwitz was actually an anti-obesity boot camp.
You hypocrites are the ones who constantly whine that people need to take responsibility for their lives and actions instead of crying that everyone else gets all the breaks. But, then, when someone suffers the direct consequences of his actions (a suffering he should have received years ago from his employer before it could become national news), suddenly you pitch a fit that they shouldn't be held responsible for things like voluntary actions. It must be nice to be able to alter your schtick to match your prejudice without even recognizing the about-face turn.
As for the "winning over people's hearts" line about suffrage and Civil Rights... revisionist comedy gold. Next you'll tell me that Auschwitz was actually an anti-obesity boot camp.
I'll agree with the revisionist gold bit, but again this article was actual bullying and only hurts the actual movement, imo.
Are you saying his employer should have fired him for making a political donation on his own time? Seriously?
Are you saying his employer should have fired him for making a political donation on his own time? Seriously?
[+]
Just think, if he had donated anonymously like he should have, he would still have his job. Oh well, better luck next time.
And lol at winning over people's hearts by assassinating two American citizens to finally pass the Civil Rights Act. That didn't ruin lives or anything.
And lol at winning over people's hearts by assassinating two American citizens to finally pass the Civil Rights Act. That didn't ruin lives or anything.
Shiva.Viciousss said: »
Just think, if he had donated anonymously like he should have, he would still have his job. Oh well, better luck next time.
And lol at winning over people's hearts by assassinating two American citizens to finally pass the Civil Rights Act. That didn't ruin lives or anything.
And lol at winning over people's hearts by assassinating two American citizens to finally pass the Civil Rights Act. That didn't ruin lives or anything.
I thought that they released the records under a FOIA request?
Are you going to call for the resignation of President Obama that campaigned in 2008, the same year as Prop 8, on marriage being between a man and a woman? You going to destroy Hillary too?
hypocrite
hypocrite
[+]
Oh, there you go again with all opinions are set in stone and can never evolve or change. Its always going to fail, but don't let that stop you.
Montgomery Bus Boycott
But I bet if they had just asked nicely they would have been able to sit wherever on the bus they'd have liked, too. More flies with sugar, amirite?
But I bet if they had just asked nicely they would have been able to sit wherever on the bus they'd have liked, too. More flies with sugar, amirite?
[+]
Instead of "NOW!" their signs should say "PLEASE!". Kindness goes a long way fellas!
I've criticized Barack Obama's flip-flopping and pandering to the *** community for years. I never called for Eich to resign nor would I call for Obama to resign. So, no, I'm not a hypocrite.
I'm not shedding tears when people suffer the consequences of their actions, though, either. Obama has received quite a lot of criticism within the *** community that rarely makes the national news because he promised the world and has only delivered a small part of it. If you want to complain about hypocrisy, complain about how the news media, both liberal and conservative, focus on the very tiny advances he has made for the *** community instead of asking where the big ones are. Plenty has been done during his administration, but most outside of DADT were nothing to be impressed by.
I'm not shedding tears when people suffer the consequences of their actions, though, either. Obama has received quite a lot of criticism within the *** community that rarely makes the national news because he promised the world and has only delivered a small part of it. If you want to complain about hypocrisy, complain about how the news media, both liberal and conservative, focus on the very tiny advances he has made for the *** community instead of asking where the big ones are. Plenty has been done during his administration, but most outside of DADT were nothing to be impressed by.
[+]
Jetackuu said: »
Are you saying his employer should have fired him for making a political donation on his own time? Seriously?
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
Montgomery Bus Boycott
But I bet if they had just asked nicely they would have been able to sit wherever on the bus they'd have liked, too. More flies with sugar, amirite?
But I bet if they had just asked nicely they would have been able to sit wherever on the bus they'd have liked, too. More flies with sugar, amirite?
Interestingly enough, there were a lot of "common sense" AA's that even today think that Parks was an idiot and should have just moved. I see their viewpoint, but it's definitely not a good one to have.
Shiva.Onorgul said: »
Jetackuu said: »
Are you saying his employer should have fired him for making a political donation on his own time? Seriously?
Not to mention: on what grounds?
[+]
Shiva.Viciousss said: »
Oh, there you go again with all opinions are set in stone and can never evolve or change. Its always going to fail, but don't let that stop you.
I am not at all surprised by your lack of people skills.
Jetackuu said: »
Not to mention: on what grounds?
As conservatives like to remind us: employment is not a right.
Jetackuu said: »
Are you saying his employer should have fired him for making a political donation on his own time? Seriously?
He got in trouble for it in 2012, but was able to hold onto his position. His promotion to CEO was the real blunder, which is on Mozilla and not him. When the company has a policy, whether official or unofficial, and you publicly go against it you are probably not going to hold onto your job, and you should definitely not be promoted.
Again: wasn't on company time, what people do in their free time is none of the companies business.
[+]
The fact he did on his own time doesn't make it any less embarrassing for Mozilla. He wasn't fired anyways.
Shiva.Viciousss said: »
Jetackuu said: »
Are you saying his employer should have fired him for making a political donation on his own time? Seriously?
He got in trouble for it in 2012, but was able to hold onto his position. His promotion to CEO was the real blunder, which is on Mozilla and not him. When the company has a policy, whether official or unofficial, and you publicly go against it you are probably not going to hold onto your job, and you should definitely not be promoted.
You know what: we're probably not going to agree on this, and I'm tired of watching this witch hunt, so good day.
Jetackuu said: »
Again: wasn't on company time, what people do in their free time is none of the companies business.
And, again, it really doesn't *** matter: Mozilla is in an at-will employment state. They can fire anyone they want at any time they want provided they cannot be shown to have done so because the person has a federal- or state-defined protected status. Being a bigot isn't protected status. Tarnishing the company's public reputation and negatively affecting its profits aren't protected status.
Now, if you want to change it so that employment is a right, I wish you all the luck in the world arguing with the right wing.
Jetackuu said: »
You know what: we're probably not going to agree on this, and I'm tired of watching this witch hunt, so good day.
The biggest problem I have with this is the time frame. There are a lot of rights that people take for granted now that would be stupid to fight against in a modern discussion. If a guy was seriously trying to revoke women's suffrage, I would be right there calling him an idiot. However, I'm not going to hold it against some old dude who was against it in 1920 but later changed his mind. The CEO supported a movement against gay marriage that passed by majority vote in 2008 in California. Sure, to some people that may look stupid now, but give the guy a break. Societies evolve, and so does public opinion. He may have been "on the wrong side of history", but I'm sure most of us will find some of our current opinions to be on the wrong side of history as well in a few decades, regardless of our political orientation.
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.