Solon and Steve don't parade their claimed belief in tolerance so publicly, though I expect they see themselves as highly tolerant also, but they, too, are intolerant bigots about religion.
You're an intolerant bigot about non religion. THAT is the source of your pique, and the fuel of your projection.
I am disapointed in you. I have seen you make the occasional constructive post on other threads. You also seem somewhat acquainted with decent literature. It seems that emotional hang-ups are preventing you from disassociating from a stable of losers. How unfortunate.
I have always advocated for freedom of religion so your projection is nonsensical. Tolerance does not mean agreement. Religions are generally intolerant to every religion but their own. This bigotry comes with the nature of supernatural superiority and exclusivity. Everyone ought to be intolerant of hateful and hurtful ideas and aims. There is no compromising with certain levels of hate. Chamberlain found that out.
It has been instructive (and distasteful) to notice the recent trend toward hate language and bigotry on the internet--especially as regards political affiliation. It is not uncommon to find posts in cyberspace that are hate mongering--pure and simple. One wonders how these people deal with sons or daughters who choose to vote for the party which is hated by the miscreant. Will the parent hate his/her own child? Will the child be disowned? This reaction was common when the hate was directed at a racial hate target, when the son or daughter marrying outside of the "pure" colour would be disowned (how pathetic such hatred appears to the modern mind, eh?).
What do you think of this trend toward classifying crimes of hate, based on political affiliation, as being "hate crimes" a la gender, colour, sexual orientation, etc.? I thought you might (as a lawyer) be able to offer some pertinent comments on where this is trending. What has been W. Virginia's experience since including crimes based on political affiliation as "hate crimes"?
Hatred based on political affiliation seems to be appearing in an increasingly organized pattern on the Internet. You would certainly be disgusted if you saw some of the name calling and asinine behaviour which substitutes for mature thought on some of the web sites--but perhaps you have seen such behaviour, so you would know what I mean. Some truly do appear to be experiencing Cranial-Rectal inversions. That would probably cause a lot of crap to escape from a person's mouth--over and over and over again--same smell, same substance, same pestilence on the human race.
Again, the modus operandi of this hate language appears to center around name calling combined with vicious adjectives. Obviously, this kind of hate language would have a vomit boy appeal to the baser and less developed intellects. There is, however, a silver lining in this vomitus of hatred: The animus is palpable, and is not camouflaged in any way.
More dangerous, is the putrid repugnance that festers inside more developed intellects, and which may express itself as unctuous politeness and pretended civility. These monsters of hate, however, are unable to resist the craven experience of attacking from behind. The rejection of their association by mature and unafraid people awakens a malignancy of resentment and causes them to expose their hypocrisy, hate, intolerance, bigotry, and emotional poverty. Most people prefer the small minded and immature cretins, whose intellects restrict them to name calling and begging their companions for support and approval.
What do you think, Christopher? Would you like to see all the States enact legislation that would classify crimes based on hatred of political affiliation as "HATE crimes"--or should the State attempt to role model a more tolerant position by demonstrating a more forgiving response to the intentional spreading of irrational hatred between groups? Considering the fact that millions of our children have access to the Internet, should either Government or the private sector be seeking legislation that would prevent mentally ill individuals from spewing hate into their young minds?
As you know, for every purveyor of hate on the net--one generally finds a toady or three who slavishly and mindlessly parrot the name calling. To what degree should toadies and insecure sycophants be held responsible for counselling hate when they are merely parroting the mindless drivel of mental midgets and emotional whiffets?
I would be interested in your sincere response. |
