3 ms·

but its fine for you to spread your prejudicial views of his religious beliefs? pot, kettle? And just because someone doesn't agree with your view doesn't inst

by davepm 9y ago

but its fine for you to spread your prejudicial views of his religious beliefs? pot, kettle? And just because someone doesn't agree with your view doesn't instantly make then [x]Phobic, its quite possible to be against something without hating on it, im sure most people who hold views similar are not scared of or hold intense hatred to those in same sex relationships, just like i don't like mushrooms, doesn't mean Im a funghiphobic.

urbanj 9y ago
Must suck that about the same time paxcoder posted this: > such persistent truths as that gay acts are gravely sinful What do you know, he turned out to be a homophobe after all. (Cue cries of hate the sin not the man there not homophobia). Pitiful
DonHopkins 9y ago
This is not a forum for accusing people of being sinners. Don't you have something braver to do than standing up for bigotry, even after the bigot has been politely and repeatedly asked by a moderator to stop his religious harangue, but was argumentative in response [1], found it "somewhat discomforting" to have his own words quoted back to him, and has declared he won't stop [2], regardless of how discomforted his own words make other people feel? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13246410 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13246410 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14187168 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14187168
- davepm 9y ago
  yet you argue against bigotry with our own bigotry? bigotry: intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself. seems you may be a sufferer too.....
  - DonHopkins 9y ago
    You are wrong to tolerate intolerance, and wrong to accuse me of bigotry for standing up against bigotry. It doesn't work that way. And the fact that you're standing up against my stand against bigotry, without bothering to stand up against the original bigotry itself, means you're tacitly supporting that bigotry yourself, which is unethical. And you're also violating the rules of this forum by continuing to post off-topic unsubstantive comments and baseless personal attacks. So stop it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Philosopher Karl Popper defined the paradox in 1945 in The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1. "Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them." He concluded that we are warranted in refusing to tolerate intolerance: "We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant."
    - davepm 9y ago
      standard liberal bullshit. everyone must tolerate your view, but you are free to only tolerate those views that align with your own moral position.
      - DonHopkins 9y ago
        Now you're violating the rules again by making personal attacks, and continuing to post off-topic unsubstantive comments. As you well know, this is not the place for that. Yet you continue to do it. I'll tell you once again: stop it. The fact that you have to resort to personal attacks instead of facts demonstrates that you have no better arguments to defend your support of bigotry and intolerance. Why do you get so angry and triggered when I and others (including Sir Karl Popper, who is "generally regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century" [1]) stand up against intolerance, bigotry, bullying and name calling, that you have to repeatedly violate the rules of Hacker News, and make baseless excuses and failed attempts to justify that very bigotry, without ever denouncing the actual bigotry yourself? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
        davepm 9y ago
        fallacious appeal to authority as your only defence? cool story bro.

by davepm 9y ago

urbanj 9y ago

Must suck that about the same time paxcoder posted this: > such persistent truths as that gay acts are gravely sinful What do you know, he turned out to be a homophobe after all. (Cue cries of hate the sin not the man there not homophobia). Pitiful

DonHopkins 9y ago

This is not a forum for accusing people of being sinners. Don't you have something braver to do than standing up for bigotry, even after the bigot has been politely and repeatedly asked by a moderator to stop his religious harangue, but was argumentative in response [1], found it "somewhat discomforting" to have his own words quoted back to him, and has declared he won't stop [2], regardless of how discomforted his own words make other people feel? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13246410 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13246410 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14187168 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14187168

davepm 9y ago
yet you argue against bigotry with our own bigotry? bigotry: intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself. seems you may be a sufferer too.....
- DonHopkins 9y ago
  You are wrong to tolerate intolerance, and wrong to accuse me of bigotry for standing up against bigotry. It doesn't work that way. And the fact that you're standing up against my stand against bigotry, without bothering to stand up against the original bigotry itself, means you're tacitly supporting that bigotry yourself, which is unethical. And you're also violating the rules of this forum by continuing to post off-topic unsubstantive comments and baseless personal attacks. So stop it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Philosopher Karl Popper defined the paradox in 1945 in The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1. "Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them." He concluded that we are warranted in refusing to tolerate intolerance: "We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant."
  - davepm 9y ago
    standard liberal bullshit. everyone must tolerate your view, but you are free to only tolerate those views that align with your own moral position.
    - DonHopkins 9y ago
      Now you're violating the rules again by making personal attacks, and continuing to post off-topic unsubstantive comments. As you well know, this is not the place for that. Yet you continue to do it. I'll tell you once again: stop it. The fact that you have to resort to personal attacks instead of facts demonstrates that you have no better arguments to defend your support of bigotry and intolerance. Why do you get so angry and triggered when I and others (including Sir Karl Popper, who is "generally regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century" [1]) stand up against intolerance, bigotry, bullying and name calling, that you have to repeatedly violate the rules of Hacker News, and make baseless excuses and failed attempts to justify that very bigotry, without ever denouncing the actual bigotry yourself? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
      - davepm 9y ago
        fallacious appeal to authority as your only defence? cool story bro.