Liberating Intolerance

[blainn]

Remember Political Correctness?  It was so 90s, so silly, and based in developing "sensitive" terms that didn't accept culturally-based "norms" as moral points of reference.  Everyone made fun of such silly terms as "vertically challenged," and "differently abled," and the whole thing faded away, right

Comments

[che]

The issue of those who were in favor of Prop 8 isn't about them being on the wrong side, nor is it about PC, it's about rights. People do not get to vote on people's rights...if we did, then there's a good chance that there would be places in America where Jim Crow would be alive and well

[blainn]

You're giving a reason to vote against Prop 8, which is quite aside the point of what I'm talking about. I'm not a California voter, nor is it before the election, so this message isn't going anywhere

[che]

I don't think the gay people using racial slurs or attacking the Mormon church are in the right. I wish people could behave with the most proper and tidy etiquette when dealing with issues they have problems with, however I find it hard to completely dismiss people who feel like their rights are being taken from them simply because of who they want to marry.

As for you claim that, "There isn't a word in anything published by the church having to do with Prop 8 that even tolerates hate toward gay and lesbian people, let alone that advocates hate toward anybody." I would submit this quote from a letter sent out by the LDS, "We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman. Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage." (http://newsroom.lds ( ... )

[blainn]

Okay, you include the quote, which shows no tolerance for any act of hatred toward anybody, and you excluded the part that specifically says that there should be no unkindness shown to gay and lesbian people (google, again, is your friend, and it has more than one source). All you have shown is what was known -- the Church encouraged its members to support Prop 8. Woo

[che]

"the Church encouraged its members to support Prop 8. Woo."

No, not "woo", they are attempting to ensure that gay people remain second class citizens and that is much more of an act of bigotry than hold signs or defacing a building. Buildings can be repaired, feelings heal over time but Prop 8 shows an attempt to relegate gay and lesbian into a class beneath those of straight people.

There is a slippery slope for legislating morality and theocracy, I'm not saying it's happening, but this shows a step towards that idea.

I suggest anyone violating the law should be punished accordingly. This includes gay people attacking or defacing Mormon church property.

I never believe I said it was okay for Mormon church property or adherents to be damaged or mistreated. I may have said that the harm of being called names is much less than the harm of being denied rights, but the two aren't the same thing.

Hate can be different and more passive than spray paint and racial slurs. Denying people basic rights is a form of hate. Tolerating

[blainn]

Actually, I wasn't particularly interested in getting into this portion of the topic in the first place. You've only briefly discussed any portion of my posted topic, and, while I appreciate that you're more strongly disagreeing with the vandalism and racial slurs I spoke about, you've still not addressed the notion of liberating intolerance that I see manifest in those actions

[che]

Okay, so first of all, all people should have equal protection and feel a degree of safety in their homes and persons. Attacks, intimidation, vandalism or whatever else came from this as a "backlash" against people who are perceived to have donated money or time or encouraged people to do so was, and remains, wrong