3 ms·

> The reactions outside and inside of the company showed very little tolerance ... The key to your nonsense idea that wanting to striping an entire class of pe

> The reactions outside and inside of the company showed very little tolerance ... The key to your nonsense idea that wanting to striping an entire class of people of a right (and materially supporting the effort) is simply a "dissenting opinion that offends them". It isn't offensive, that trivializes it. It is a legal attack on class of people. If he had donated $1000 to a group to reintroduce segregation in public schools, I highly doubt you would defend him under the idea "he just has a dissenting opinion that races shouldn't mix and materially supported the effort" -- or would you?

devindotcom 13y ago
I'm really glad there's such a good historical parallel - miscegenation and segregation (even 'separate but equal') are a great way of putting this whole thing in context. I've seen a lot of hedging once that theme is introduced over the last few weeks.
muyuu 13y ago
I choose dialogue over intimidation and fear, no matter what. Esp. when this prop passed with 52% of the vote.
- devindotcom 13y ago
  Were demonstrators in the 60s using intimidation and fear? Should they have had a dialogue with the people who considered them inferior humans, and did not permit them to sit on the same stools white people did? Demonstration does not need to be polite, especially when the other side has been anything but. Speaking out en masse is a perfectly ordinary and effective form of protest.
- MetaCosm 13y ago
  What nonsense. You want a dialogue with every racist, sexist and homophobic jerk in the country, you are welcome to it -- and good luck. Western society by and large has decided that certain issues are no longer up for "dialogue". Racism is wrong. Sexism is wrong. 61% of young republican (18-29) leaning voters support marriage equality -- which means this issue is actually settled, just waiting a few generations for old homophobic people to shuffle off this mortal coil. Until you get on here and vigorously defend holocaust deniers, racists and sexists who materially support such perspectives, I am prone to believe you have another agenda here.

devindotcom 13y ago

I'm really glad there's such a good historical parallel - miscegenation and segregation (even 'separate but equal') are a great way of putting this whole thing in context. I've seen a lot of hedging once that theme is introduced over the last few weeks.

muyuu 13y ago

I choose dialogue over intimidation and fear, no matter what. Esp. when this prop passed with 52% of the vote.

devindotcom 13y ago
Were demonstrators in the 60s using intimidation and fear? Should they have had a dialogue with the people who considered them inferior humans, and did not permit them to sit on the same stools white people did? Demonstration does not need to be polite, especially when the other side has been anything but. Speaking out en masse is a perfectly ordinary and effective form of protest.
MetaCosm 13y ago
What nonsense. You want a dialogue with every racist, sexist and homophobic jerk in the country, you are welcome to it -- and good luck. Western society by and large has decided that certain issues are no longer up for "dialogue". Racism is wrong. Sexism is wrong. 61% of young republican (18-29) leaning voters support marriage equality -- which means this issue is actually settled, just waiting a few generations for old homophobic people to shuffle off this mortal coil. Until you get on here and vigorously defend holocaust deniers, racists and sexists who materially support such perspectives, I am prone to believe you have another agenda here.