Bigot of the year award goes to Stonewall...

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Russ

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.

That was in response to the notion, which this thread appears based on, that someone who calls someone else a bigot must himself be a bigot, which to my mind is a silly semantic game, as is intolerance of intolerance is also intolerance. There's a real world out there, with real bigots, and really intolerant people, and I think it's good they are called out. That's not to say that people aren't entitled to opinions or beliefs. It does mean that if your opinion means you act like an idiot, I will call you an idiot. If that's intolerant, then so be it.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by danielf

That was in response to the notion, which this thread appears based on, that someone who calls someone else a bigot must himself be a bigot, which to my mind is a silly semantic game, as is intolerance of intolerance is also intolerance. There's a real world out there, with real bigots, and really intolerant people, and I think it's good they are called out. That's not to say that people aren't entitled to opinions or beliefs. It does mean that if your opinion means you act like an idiot, I will call you an idiot. If that's intolerant, then so be it.

OK so you admit to being intolerant, glad you're onboard.

Not that I'm suggesting there's essentially anything wrong with intolerance alone. My issue is with people who claim to hate/oppose/be activists against any form of intolerance yet demonstrate intolerance in the way you allude.

Along with what was said earlier, it seem for some people that intolerance is only wrong when it fits in with their views when in actual fact I'd suggest intolerance is far more a human trait than people would admit.

Originally Posted by danielf

No. There is no way that it is a religious belief that a same sex partnership is harmful to someone's physical health.
.

Yes it can mean exactly that if you are a Catholic .You have to include other doctrines of Catholicism to understand why he believes it .The Catholic church believes in heterosexual partnerships for life and no sex before marriage so promiscuity, particularly amongst the gay community was blamed for the spread of aids ,if they had stuck to a traditional form of partnership i.e one partner and no promiscuity as taught by the church then diseases like aids would not have spread the way it did .

Originally Posted by Russ

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.

But intolerance is not the same thing as bigotry.

I am intolerant of rapists and kiddy-fiddlers - I would be amazed if someone called me a bigot because of that.....

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Hugh

But intolerance is not the same thing as bigotry.

In fairness it wasn't myself who started the thread..

[danielf]

Originally Posted by martyh

Yes it can mean exactly that if you are a Catholic .You have to include other doctrines of Catholicism to understand why he believes it .The Catholic church believes in heterosexual partnerships for life and no sex before marriage so promiscuity, particularly amongst the gay community was blamed for the spread of aids ,if they had stuck to a traditional form of partnership i.e one partner and no promiscuity as taught by the church then diseases like aids would not have spread the way it did .

Perhaps then it's time for a most delusional and deliberately offensive person of the year award. I'm sorry. There's no excuse for the type of things O'Brien says and the way in which he says them. I think he's a bigot and an obnoxious prat, and Stonewall are right in singling him out.

Ruth Davison was voted politician of the year at the same award ceremony and was promptly boo'd during her acceptance speech when she said the bigot of the year award was offensive and should be withdrawn

During her acceptance speech, Ms Davidson said it was wrong to use the term “bigot” and that it was important to “respect people who have a different view”.
She added: “The case for equality is far better made by demonstrating the sort of generosity, tolerance and love we would wish to see more of in this world.”

[Russ]

I think that says more about Stonewall's attitude than anything else.

What's the problem? O'Brian says gay marriage is a 'grotesque subversion', Stonewall calls him a bigot. It's just tit-for-tat nonsense. I don't think O'Brian's religion exempts him from being criticised..

Originally Posted by Damien

What's the problem? O'Brian says gay marriage is a 'grotesque subversion', Stonewall calls him a bigot. It's just tit-for-tat nonsense. I don't think O'Brian's religion exempts him from being criticised..

Stonewall would have been better off giving the award to the catholic church rather than an individual, a few years ago they gave the award to Heinz because the company bowed to public complaints and removed an add that showed two men kissing ,they didn't single out the person who pulled the add

Originally Posted by Damien

What's the problem? O'Brian says gay marriage is a 'grotesque subversion', Stonewall calls him a bigot. It's just tit-for-tat nonsense. I don't think O'Brian's religion exempts him from being criticised..

Stonewall isn't criticising his opinion - it is launching an ad hominem attack on his person. To call someone a bigot is to claim that their opinion should not be listened to. Having spent so many years demanding to be heard and accepted it is gross hypocrisy of Stonewall to behave in this way.

[Vieil Homme]

Sunday @ 10:00 this subject is being discussed on BBC 1 Sunday Morning Live with the question is Stonewall's "Bigot of the year" award inappropriate? and they have a poll running.

You can even have your view via text...