Bigot of the year award goes to Stonewall...

Originally Posted by Russ

...granted however for them in return to label him a bigot because they strongly disagree with his views makes them bigots.

Hence this thread.

Erm, by that logic, if I call someone a racist because they openly espouse denigratory opinions that people of a different skin colour were less intelligent / more violent / smelt funny / acted strangely just because of their skin colour, that would make me a bigot?

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Erm, by that logic, if I call someone a racist because they openly espouse denigratory opinions that people of a different skin colour were less intelligent / more violent / smelt funny / acted strangely just because of their skin colour, that would make me a bigot?

This is it. The logic this thread appears to be predicated on is that you can't call someone a bigot because that makes you a bigot for not allowing the other an opinion. Which is nonsense...

The reality is that some people are bigots, and Cardinal O'Brien appears to be one of them. The people in Stonewall may well be bigots themselves, but not because they're calling O'Brien a bigot for a genuinely held belief. They're calling him a bigot for talking bollocks to back up his beliefs.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by danielf

I disagree. They'd be bigots if they labelled him a bigot for saying he objected to same sex partnerships on the grounds of religious beliefs. Which they didn't.

A novel way for them to claim the moral high ground.

Originally Posted by Hugh

Erm, by that logic, if I call someone a racist because they openly espouse denigratory opinions that people of a different skin colour were less intelligent / more violent / smelt funny / acted strangely just because of their skin colour, that would make me a bigot?

Well by definition, intolerance of intolerance is also intolerance...

Originally Posted by danielf

I'm sorry, but anyone stating the following:



Is a moron who deserves slating regardless of his reasons for thinking what he does. Having religious beliefs is no excuse for spouting unsubstantiated rubbish that has no factual basis whatsoever.

If he wants to say that he objects to same sex partnerships because of religious reasons then fine, but the above just shows he is willing to say any old rubbish to back up his beliefs, which makes him a ermm bigot...

The Catholic church does believe that same sex partnerships are harmful to their physical ,mental and spiritual well being though ,whether you,me or anyone else thinks it's rubbish or not is not the point ,he personally cannot be a bigot for saying what his religion believes .

[Tezcatlipoca]

Then perhaps his religion itself is bigoted?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Matt D

Then perhaps his religion itself is bigoted?

If his particular brand of Christianity is considered bigoted then that's a valid viewpoint - which means aiming the title at him makes Stonewall out to be even more petty and childish than it usually is.

Originally Posted by Russ

If his particular brand of Christianity is considered bigoted then that's a valid viewpoint - which means aiming the title at him makes Stonewall out to be even more petty and childish than it usually is.

Agreed ,one of the reasons why breakaway religions happen is because people don't agree with aspects of the main religion ,hence the Church of England for example .Allowing same sex partnerships/marriage or even abortion in the Catholic church would mean a fundamental change to the beliefs of that church.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Russ

Well by definition, intolerance of intolerance is also intolerance...

And childish semantic games are, by definition, childish semantic games.

---------- Post added at 16:10 ---------- Previous post was at 16:06 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

The Catholic church does believe that same sex partnerships are harmful to their physical ,mental and spiritual well being though ,whether you,me or anyone else thinks it's rubbish or not is not the point ,he personally cannot be a bigot for saying what his religion believes .

Sorry, the suggestion that same sex partnerships are harmful to people's physical health is demonstrable rubbish. And if it's harmful to someone's mental health it's because of the attitudes of the likes of O'Brien.

Let's face it. O'Brien is a bigot.

Originally Posted by danielf

Let's face it. O'Brien is a bigot.

no he's a Catholic ,you seem to be applying your own personal religious beliefs to the argument.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by danielf

And childish semantic games are, by definition, childish semantic games.

As are inconvenient truths. With many left wing people and activist groups the trend when faced with such is to simply write it off.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by martyh

no he's a Catholic ,you seem to be applying your own personal religious beliefs to the argument.

No. There is no way that it is a religious belief that a same sex partnership is harmful to someone's physical health. It is a rubbish claim designed to back his religious belief (which he's entitled to) that it's a sin to be in a same sex partnership. There's furthermore no reason why he should have that belief, as there are plenty of people in the same religion that don't share that belief.

So, O'Brien is either stupid, or he is willingly telling falsehoods to back up his beliefs. I suspect that latter, and that makes him a bigot. If he were to say that he objects to same sex partnerships because he beliefs that the bible dictates that marriage should be between a man and a woman it would be a completely different matter.

---------- Post added at 16:36 ---------- Previous post was at 16:32 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ

As are inconvenient truths. With many left wing people and activist groups the trend when faced with such is to simply write it off.

Not sure what being left or right wing has to do with anything, but bringing it into this discussion makes you look rather silly.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

I have thought of stonewall as an unpleasant little group since their campaign of outing people many yeaars ago

That wasn't Stonewall but OutRage! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OutRage!

[Russ]

Originally Posted by danielf

Not sure what being left or right wing has to do with anything, but bringing it into this discussion makes you look rather silly.

Why? You don't consider Stonewall to be left wing?

With many pressure groups and people with view they reflect, if they feel the are confronted by an example of the issue they're against, instead of debating and actually listening to the other person's views they simply attack or write them off. Similar in fact to what you did.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Russ

Similar in fact to what you did.

Ahem

Originally Posted by danielf

If he were to say that he objects to same sex partnerships because he beliefs that the bible dictates that marriage should be between a man and a woman it would be a completely different matter.

I believe Stonewall are right (if a little childish) to call O'Brien a bigot, because, on the basis of what he's said, I think he is a bigot.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by danielf

I believe Stonewall are right (if a little childish) to call O'Brien a bigot, because, on the basis of what he's said, I think he is a bigot.

That's not in doubt. But you appeared to be responding to my comment of "intolerance of intolerance is also intolerance."

A lot of activist groups simply wave that idea off, rather than accepting or admitting the double standards.